New  York  &  Brooklyn  Bridge. 


Report  of  the  Board  of  Experts 


TO  THE  TERMINAL  COMMITTEE  OF  THE 
BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES  AS  TO 


Enlargement  of  Traffic  Facilities 
of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge, 


WITH  APPENDIX  CONTAINING  THE  REPORT  DESCRIPTIVE  OF  THE 
RECOMMENDED  PLAN  SUBMITTED  TO  THE 
BOARD  OF  EXPERTS  BY 


A.  M.  Wellington,  Mem.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 


New  York,  1888. 


< 


lEx  ICtbrts 


SEYMOUR  DURST 


When  you  leave,  please  leave  this  hook 

Because  it  has  been  said 
"Sver'thinc)  comes  t'  him  who  waits 

Except  a  loaned  hook." 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gift  of  Seymour  B.  Durst  Old  York  Library 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/newyorkbrooklynbOObroo 


New  York  &  Brooklyn  Bridge. 


Report  of  the  Board  of  Experts 


TO  THE  TERMINAL  COMMITTEE  OF  THE 
BOARD  OF    TRUSTEES  AS  TO 

Enlargement  of  Traffic  Facilities 
of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge, 

WITH  APPENDIX  CONTAINING  THE  REPORT  DESCRIPTIVE  OF  THE 
RECOMMENDED  PLAN  SUBMITTED  TO  THE 
BOARD  OF  EXPERTS  BY 


A.  M.  Wellington,  Mem.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 


New  York,  188S. 


TABLE 

Showing  the  Comparative  Areas,  Assessed  Valuation,  and 
Assessed  Valuation  per  Square  Mile  of  the  Belts  at 
Equal  Distances  from  the  NEW  YORK  City  Hall  in  the 
cities  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  as  shown  in  the 
accompanying  Map. 


[For  further  explanation  of  Map  and  Table,  see  Appendix,  page  4/.] 


BELT  FROM 
NEW  YORK 
CITY  HALL. 

NEW  YORK. 

BROOKLYN. 

Area 
sq.  miles. 

Assessed 
Value  in 
millions. 

Assessed 
Value 
per  sq.  mile. 

Area 
sq.  miles. 

Assessed  t  Assessed 
Value  in  1  Value 
millions,    per  sq.  mile. 

Below  City  Hall 
C.  H.  to  1  M. 
1  to  2  M. 

0.5 
1.8 
2.3 

159.4 
170.1 
213.9 

$318,800,000 
130,800,000 
93,000,000 

0.9 

66.3   !  $73,700,000 

Total  business 
section. 

4.1 

543.4 

$132,500,000 

0.9 

66.3 

$73,700,000 

2  to  3  M. 

3  to  4  M. 

4  to  5  M. 

5  to  6  M. 

6  to  7  M. 

7  to  8  M. 

8  to  9  M. 

2.0 
1.9 
1.5 
1.4 
1.6 
1.9 
3.0 

194.8 
186.8 
106.7 
79.1 
47.5 
47.4 
36.8 

$97,400,000 
98,300,000 
71,100,000 
56,500,000 
29,700,000 
25,000,000 
12,300,000 

2.7 
5.0 
8.0 
12.6 
15.2 
10.5 
7.2 

88.0 
114.9 
66.7 
36.2 
19.2 
7.0 
3.0 

$32,600,000 
23,000,000 
8,300,000 
2,900,000 
1,200,000 
400,000 

Total  residence 
section. 

13.3 

699.1 

$52,600,000 

61.2 

335.0 

$5,470,000 

Brooklyn  is  considered  for  the  purposes  of  this  table  to  include  the  entire  area 
of  Long  Island  shown  on  the  map,  and  nothing  beyond  the  limits  of  the  map. 
The  assessed  valuation  (1887)  of  this  whole  area  is,  as  nearly  as  may  be 
$401,300,000. 

The  area  of  both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  which  lies  within  a  distance  of  2 
miles  of  the  New  York  City  Hall  is  regarded  as  the  business  section,  and  colored 
dark  olive.  In  reality,  the  area  thus  colored  in  Brooklyn  is  for  the  most  part  a 
choice  residence  section,  its  value  per  square  mile  being  about  that  of  New  York 
residence  property  above  59th  Street. 

The  assessed  valuation  in  both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  is  supposed  to  be 
somewhat  less  than  60  per  cent,  of  the  market  value. 

The  areas  given  exclude  all  park  areas.  No  attempt  has  been  made  to  make  the 
areas  precise.    They  have  been  simply  scaled  from  the  map. 

The  valuation  of  each  ward,  in  millions  of  dollars  and  fractions,  is  shown  in  red. 
The  fraction  of  this  valuation  appertaining  to  each  mile  belt  has  been  estimated, 
as  also  the  valuations  of  the  outlying  towns,  which  are  not  given  on  the  map. 


REPORT  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  EXPERTS, 
NEW  YORK  &  BROOKLYN  BRIDGE. 


New  York,  February  23d,  1888. 

To  JAMES  HOWELL.  Esq.,  Prest.,  I  Committee  on  Terminal  Facilities  of 
CHAS.  MACDONALb,  Esq.,  and  >  the  Trustees  of  the  New  York  and 
THOS.  C.  CLARKE,  Esq.  \      Brooklyn  Bridge. 

Gentlemen : 

The  undersigned  acting  under  your  appointment  as  a  Board  of 
Experts,  dated  November  10th,  1887,  to  give  an  "opinion  as  to  the 
best  method  of  increasing  the  number  and  size  of  trains  upon  the 
Bridge,  by  such  changes  in  the  New  York  terminus  as  will  allow  of 
the  same,"  respectfully  submit  the  following 

REPORT. 

The  Board  convened  on  November  12th,  for  organization  and 
general  preliminary  conference  with  yourselves  and  your  Chief 
Engineer  and  Superintendent,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the 
scope  of  the  whole  problem  you  desired  us  to  investigate  and  report 
upon. 

At  this  meeting  it  was  arranged  that  regular  meetings  of  our  Board 
should  be  held  every  Saturday  afternoon,  for  the  purpose  of  consid- 
ering the  plans  and  hearing  statements  made  in  regard  to  them,  by 
persons  wishing  to  submit  their  views  to  us.  In  the  intervening  time 
between  these  regular  meetings,  considerable  time  has  been  devoted 
to  the  study  of  the  plans  presented  to  us,  and  to  investigations  in 
detail  of  the  many  phases  of  what  has  proved  to  be  a  very  compli- 
cated problem. 

In  pursuance  of  this  course,  we  have  studied  the  plans  with  their 
accompanying  written  explanations,  and  heard  full  statements  rela- 
tive thereto  offered  by  : 

ist.    Mr.  Chas.  E.  Emery,  Civil  Engineer. 

2d.     Mr.  A.  M.  Wellington,  Civil  Engineer. 

3d.     Messrs.  Wm.  H.  H.  Sisum  &  Robt.  Avery. 

4th.    Mr.  C.  C.  Martin,  your  Chief  Engineer  &  Supt. 

5th.    Mr.  G.  Leverich,  Civil  Engineer, 
amounting  in  all  to  seventeen  distinct  plans,  or  modifications  of 
plans,  each  of  which  has  been  severally  taken  under  advisement,  and 
all  of  which,  we  find,  can  be  classified  under  one  of  the  following 
general  systems  of  operation. 


4 


I.  The  present  system,  which  for  brevity  we  call  The  " Tail 
Switching"  System. 

II.  The  "Head  House"  System. 

III.  The  "Loop"  System. 

IV.  The  "Circulating"  System. 

Numerous  other  plans,  and  possible  variations  or  combinations  of 
suggested  plans,  occuring  to  us  during  the  course  of  our  investiga- 
tions, have  also  been  carefully  studied. 

As  a  necessary  preliminary  to  a  thorough  understanding  of  the 
adaptability  of  any  of  these  several  systems  to  the  requirements  of 
the  cable  railway  traffic  of  your  Bridge,  we  were  at  the  outset  im- 
pressed with  the  paramount  necessity  of  thoroughly  analyzing  and 
fixing  the  conditions  of  the  traffic  itself,  pursuant  to  arriving,  if  pos- 
sible, at  a  reasonable  forecast  of  what  volume  should  be  provided 
for  now,  and  in  the  near,  as  well  as  the  distant,  future. 

To  this  end  we  have  obtained  from  your  Superintendent,  full  and 
detailed  statistics  of  what  this  traffic  has  been  from  its  commence- 
ment, down  to  the  close  of  the  year  1887.  Collateral  to  this,  and  as 
giving  valuable  information  as  to  the  general  trend  of  traffic  on 
analagous  lines  of  public  diurnal  transportation,  we  have  studied  the 
statistics  of  the  New  York  elevated  railroads,  New  York  horse  car 
lines,  Brooklyn  ferry-boats,  etc..  etc.,  all  of  which  shed  valuable  light 
upon  the  subject  of  the  probable  ratio  of  yearly  increase  ;  and  inci- 
dental thereto  have  given  careful  consideration  to  a  most  interesting 
map,  with  its  accompanying  statistics,  prepared  and  submitted  by  Mr. 
A.  M.  Wellington,  C.  E.,  showing  the  comparative  residential  areas 
in  the  cities  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  within  equal  distances  of 
the  City  Hall,  New  York,  which  seems  to  afford  very  convincing 
reasons  for  the  belief  that  the  daily  morning  and  evtning  traffic  be- 
tueen  the  two  cities  may  reasonably  be  expected  to  increase  rapidly 
in  the  very  near  future,  to  an  extent  equal  to  the  entire  ultimate 
capacity  of  the  Bridge  railway,  provided  the  proper  facilities  for 
handling  it  with  due  safety  and  convenience  are  provided. 

Statistics  furnished  by  your  Chief  Engineer  and  Superintendent 
show  that  the  total  number  of  passengers  carried  by  the  Bridge  rail- 
way in  1886  was  24,478,324,  and  in  1887,  it  was  28,238,549,  showing 
an  increase  of  3,760,225,  or  15.36  per  cent. 

The  averages  resulting  from  actual  count  taken  on  seventeen  days, 
in  different  months,  of  several  different  years,  show  that  eighty-two 
per  cent  of  the  traffic  per  day  of  twenty-four  hours  is  carried  in  the 
day  twelve  hours  between  seven  o'clock  a.  m.  and  seven  o'clock 
p.  M.  ;  and  also  that  the  average  maximum  number  carried  in  a 
single  hour  is  fifteen  per  cent,  of  the  number  carried  in  the  day 


5 


twelve  hours,  being  the  hour  between  seven  o'clock  and  eight  o'clock 
a.  m.,  carried  from  Brooklyn  to  New  York. 

From  these  data  the  following  table  of  traffic  for  the  next  ten  years 
is  estimated,  on  the  assumption  that  the  ratio  of  yearly  increase  will 
continue  at  fifteen  per  cent,  until  1892,  and  after  that  at  the  rate  of 
ten  per  cent.  The  probabilities,  however,  are  strong  that,  should 
increased  facilities  be  provided  for  comfortably  and  conveniently 
receiving,  handling,  moving  and  discharging  the  traffic,  it  will  exceed 
this  ratio  of  increase  for  a  few  years,  up  to  a  limit,  however,  which 
cannot  be  now  determined,  owing  to  lack  of  data  on  which  to 
predicate  it.  But  it  is  safe  to  assume  that,  for  some  years  in  the 
future,  this  traffic  will  increase  approximately  in  proportion  to  the 
increased  facilities  provided  for  its  accommodation.  We  therefore 
consider  the  figures  given  in  this  table  as  the  minimum  of  expect- 
ancy, and  we  are  of  the  opinion  that,  should  the  facilities  hereinafter 
suggested  and  recommended  be  provided,  it  is  quite  probable  that 
the  maximum  shown  in  it  may  be  attained  in  less  than  the  ten  years 
allowed  for  it. 


Estimated  Future  Traffic,  New  York  and 
Brooklyn  Bridge 


Year. 

Annual 
Total. 

24-hour  daily 
average. 

12-hour 

average,  7  a.m. 
to  7  p.m., 

82*. 

1 -hour  average, 
7  to  8  a.m., 
Brooklyn  to 

New  York,  15%. 

Number  of  Cars 
seating  4;  persons 
required  for  the 
1-hour  average. 

1888 

32,474.33° 

88,980 

7  2,960 

10,944 

261 

1889 

37,345-4^o 

1 02,320 

83,900 

12,585 

3CO 

1890 

42,947.300 

1 1 7,660 

96,480 

M,472 

345 

1891 

49'389,4oo 

i35-3io 

1  10,950 

1  6,642 

396 

1892 

56,797,8ro 

155, 6lo 

I  27.600 

I  9, 140 

456 

62,477,590 

171,170 

14O.360 

21,054 

5°' 

1894 

68,725,350 

188,280 

'54,39° 

23-'58 

55i 

1895 

75,597,88o 

207, 1 20 

169,840 

25,476 

606 

1896 

83,157-670 

227,830 

186,820 

28,023 

667 

1897 

91, 473-44o 

250,610 

205,500 

30,325 

734 

Present  capacity,  three-car  trains,  1  ^-minute  headway,         .        .  120 
"       four-car       "  "  "...  160 


Having  arrived  at  this  conclusion,  it  seemed  clear  that  our  efforts 
must  necessarily  be  directed  to  the  determination  of  the  plan  which 
will  best  provide  terminal  facilities,  and  a  system  of  operating  trains, 
in  number  and  length,  commensurate  with  the  maximum  capacity  of 
the  Bridge  railway  when  operated  upon  a  system  affording  the  closest 
approximation  to  absolute  safety  that  sound  judgment  in  practical 
operation  will  admit  of ;  and  in  this  connection,  we  beg  leave  to 


6 


draw  your  attention  to  an  aspect  of  the  case  which  has  not  appar- 
ently thus  far  received  the  attention  it  deserves,  and  to  respectfully 
suggest  that  the  management  of  this  great  Bridge  should  assume  the 
initiative  in  a  manifestly  much  needed  reform  in  our  system  of  street 
car  traffic  generally.  Yours  being  the  only  line  of  public  travel,  the 
management  of  which  is  wholly  in  the  control  of  public  authority, 
an  example  to  others  set  by  you,  adding  so  materially  to  the  comfort 
and  safety  of  the  travelling  public,  could  not  fail  to  secure  its  highest 
commendation  ;  we  refer  to  a  reform  in  the  existing  barbarous  cus- 
tom of  allowing  standing  passengers  to  crowd  the  cars  to  more  than 
double  their  seating  capacity,  sometimes  carrying  over  one  hundred 
in  a  car  seating  but  forty.  It  is  not  a  question  for  the  standing 
passenger  to  decide,  whether  he  prefers  to  stand  rather  than  wait  for 
the  next  train.  Undoubtedly  he  has  the  right  to  determine  for  him- 
self the  value  of  a  minute  and  a  half  or  two  minutes  of  his  time,  but 
he  has  not  the  right  to  enjoy  this  privilege  at  the  expense  of  serious 
encroachment  upon  the  rights  of  the  passengers  who  have  preceeded 
him  and  found  seats,  nor  to  compel  them  to  accept  his  views  of 
comfort  or  necessity  as  a  standard  of  theirs.  In  cars  crowded  to 
this  extent,  it  is  the  seated  passenger  that  not  infrequently  becomes 
the  greatest  sufferer,  being  often  rendered  incapable  of  moving  in  any 
direction,  under  which  circumstances,  the  slightest  panic  or  appre- 
hension of  danger  becomes  at  once  seriously  magnified,  subjecting 
the  weak,  timid  and  helpless  to  a  degree  of  nervous  suffering 
certainly  not  in  accord  with  modern  civilization,  nor  with  a  just  regard 
to  the  rights  and  privileges  of  others.  To  remedy  this,  and  give 
every  passenger  a  seat,  would,  by  1897,  with  the  assumed  minimum 
of  traffic,  require  the  ability  to  circulate  over  six  times  as  many  cars  in 
a  single  hour  as  is  done  on  the  present  system  of  three-car  trains,  forty 
trains  per  hour,  and  over  four  and  one-half  times  as  many  as  will  be 
moved  under  the  four-car  train  system  soon  to  be  inaugurated. 

In  selecting  such  a  plan  and  system  and  in  recommending  it  for 
your  adoption,  we  do  so  with  a  grave  sense  of  the  responsibility 
resting  upon  us,  to  recommend  nothing  of  a  doubtful  or  experimental 
nature,  or  that  is  not  based  upon  the  results  of  experience  deduced 
from  the  best  and  safest  principles  of  modern  railroad  practice.  In 
considering  this  phrase  of  the  subject,  we  desire  to  state  that  we  are 
deeply  sensible  of  the  good  judgment  expressed  in  the  injunction 
laid  upon  us  by  the  following  words  in  your  letter  appointing  us  : 
''It  is  our  desire  not  to  limit  your  judgment  in  any  way,  and  to  ask 
you  to  report  to  us,  what  you  consider  absolutely  the  best  method  of 
increasing  the  traffic  facilities,  consistent  with  safety  ;  and  we  would 
like  to  be  advised  what  safety  appliances  are  necessary  in  connection 
with  the  system  you  recommend." 


7 


Keeping  this  injunction  constantly  in  mind,  we  have,  in  reviewing 
every  plan  presented  to  us,  most  carefully  considered  and  investi- 
gated to  what  extent  each  contained  elements,  if  any,  of  danger, 
especially  those  resulting  from  collision  or  derailment. 

It  is  well  known  to  and  admitted  by  all  practical  railroad  managers 
that  among  the  many  causes  which  produce  derailments,  by  far  the 
most  prolific  are  those  resulting,  in  many  ways,  from  the  use  of 
switches,  frogs  and  crossings  ;  and  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
their  liberal  use  is  an  unavoidable  necessity  in  the  operation  of 
surface  railroads,  it  is  the  constant  and  most  solicitous  effort  of 
every  good  railroad  operator  to  reduce  their  use  to  the  lowest  pos- 
sible minimum  on  lines  of  main  track,  and  to  place  those  that  cannot 
be  dispensed  with  in  positions  the  least  likely  to  cause  danger,  as 
also  to  guard  them  with  every  possible  device  to  make  their  use  safe, 
and  to  signal  notice  to  approaching  trains  when  they  have  been 
moved  to  positions  menacing  danger.  Grade  crossings  of  railroad 
tracks,  especially  on  main  lines,  are  also  admitted  by  all  railroad 
authorities  to  be  especially  dangerous.  To  emphasize  this  fact,  it 
is  only  necessary  to  note  the  vast  sums  of  money  it  is  now  deemed 
good  judgment  to  expend  in  construction  of  new  and  in  changing  of 
old  lines  of  railroad  in  order  to  eliminate  their  use,  and  in  the  now 
almost  universal  practice  of  providing  the  safety  device  of  interlocking 
signals  and  throw-off  or  derailing  switches,  as  a  protection  in  the  use 
of  those  which  cannot  be  dispensed  with,  in  order  to  discern  what  a 
very  limited  degree  of  absolute  safety  is  really  derived  from  the  so- 
called  safety  appliances.  Could  anything  be  more  convincing  than 
the  fact  that  in  the  use  of  the  throw-off  switch,  used  in  connection 
with  the  interlocking  signals  for  grade  crossings,  should  the  warning 
signals  be,  either  through  negligence,  design  or  other  cause,  disre- 
garded, the  alternative  is  the  deliberate  acceptance  of  the  minor 
accident,  of  derailing  the  engine  on  the  throw-off  switch,  in  order  to 
secure  immunity  from  an  impending  major  accident  on  the  crossing. 
We  are  therefore  unanimous,  and  most  emphatic,  in  the  opinion  that 
under  no  circumstances  should  such  devices  be  employed  upon  the 
tracks  of  the  Bridge  railway.  They  might,  of  course,  be  employed 
safely  for  a  long  time,  but  experience  unerringly  points  to  the  in- 
evitable accident,  which,  sooner  or  later,  is  sure  to  occur.  We  have, 
therefore,  arrived  at  this  conclusion  as  a  cardinal  principle  :  that  if 
an  arrangement  of  the  New  York  terminal,  and  a  system  of  train 
operation  can  be  found,  commensurate  with  the  maximum  train 
capacity  of  the  Bridge  railway,  preserving  a  continuous  main  track, 
unbroken  by  either  switch,  frog  or  crossing,  that  is  unquestionably 
the  one  to  be  recommended  for  your  adoption,  and  while  it  is 
manifestly  impossible  and  unnecessary  to  encumber  this  Report  with 


8 


an  extended  recital  in  detail  of  all  the  reasons  which  have  decided 
us  adversely  upon  any  of  the  plans  included  under  the  heads  I.  to 
III.  inclusive,  it  may  be  desirable  to  state  briefly  the  leading 
objectionable  features  contained  in  them. 

I.  The  "  Tail  Switching"  (present)  system  is  objected  to  : 
First. — Because  its  limit  of  platform  length  is  for  six  cars  onlv, 

without  possibility  of  any  further  extension. 

Second. — It  requires  the  very  objectionable  and  justly  inadmissable 
necessity  of  switching  all  trains  on  a  bridge  over  Chatham  and 
Centre  Streets,  almost  to  the  Hall  of  Records,  in  shifting  them  from 
the  incoming  to  the  outgoing  track. 

Third. — In  order  to  obtain  sufficient  length  for  six  car  trains,  west 
of  the  west  end  of  the  station,  it  becomes  necessary  to  extend  the 
easterly  end  so  far  eastwardly,  as  to  cause  an  unreasonable  distance 
for  passengers  to  walk,  in  going  to  and  leaving  the  cars,  and  thereby 
create  a  tendency  to  inequality  of  loading  in  the  several  cars  of  the 
trains. 

Fourth. — By  thus  extending  the  easterly  end  of  the  station  so  far 
eastwardly,  the  necessity  of  considerably  raising  its  grade-level  is 
created,  owing  to  the  steep  gradient  of  the  railway  such  extension 
is  projected  over ;  adding  very  seriously  to  the  already  sufficiently 
objectionable  rise  by  stairs  to  reach  the  platform  level  from  the 
streets. 

II.  The  "  Head  House  "  system. 

As  this  system  cannot  possibly  be  operated  withont  the  employ- 
ment of  a  complicated  system  of  switches,  frogs,  crossings  and 
signalling  apparatus,  of  more  than  doubtful  efficiency,  we  are  satis- 
fied that  it  contains  elements  of  danger,  of  a  gravity  sufficient  to 
preclude  its  consideration,  notwithstanding  that  in  some  other 
respects  it  may  have  desirable  features. 

III.  The  "  Loop  "  system  is  objectionable  : 

First,  because  it  requires  the  use  of  dangerous  switches  and  frogs. 
Second,  it  is  limited  in  extent  to  trains  of  six  or  seven  cars'  length 
at  utmost. 

Third,  it  has  the  same  objection  noted  in  regard  to  system  I.,  and 
common  to  any  arrangement  of  station  planned  longitudinally  east 
and  west. 

Of  all  the  plans  submitted  to  our  review,  the  one  alone  which 
seems  best  to  conform  to  the  necessary  conditions,  is  the  simple 
"  Circulating  System,"  as  represented  in  its  general  design  by  the 
plan  offered  by  Mr.  A.  M.  Wellington,  C.  E.,  in  which  the  objec- 
tionable features  of  all  the  others  above  referred  to  are  eliminated. 
We  have  very  carefully  studied  its  adaptability  to  all  conditions  of 


9 


the  Bridge  railway  traffic,  with  the  result  of  a  decided  and  unani- 
mous conclusion  in  our  minds  that  the  simple  circulating  system  is 
unquestionably  the  one  which  best  and  most  completely  fits  the 
conditions  presented.  We  recommend  that  the  diameter  of  the 
semi-circular  loop  be  not  less  than  180  feet  (90  feet  centre  radius  of 
the  track),  for  the  purpose  of  securing,  first,  ease  of  traction,  and 
secondly,  ample  rotunda  platform  space,  and  while  deeming  it  not 
properly  within  the  scope  of  this  report  to  enter  into  extended  details 
of  the  line  of  investigation,  and  of  the  arguments  which  have  led  to 
this  conclusion,  doubtless  it  is  proper  that  we  should  herein  note 
some  of  the  leading  advantages  which  this  system  is  found  to  possess, 
and  which  have  had  great  weight  with  us  in  deciding  upon  it  as  the 
one  to  be  recommended  to  you  :  they  are 

First. — Safety  in  operation  ;  for  the  reasons  hereinbefore  given. 

Second. — Simplicity;  making  the  railway  an  unbroken,  circulating 
cable  system,  thereby  eliminating  the  costly,  noisy,  inconvenient 
auxiliary  locomotive  terminal  switching  service,  with  its  concomitant 
nuisances  of  noise,  dirt,  gases,  cinders,  dripping  from  water 
supply,  etc. 

Third. — Economy;  in  that  it  requires  no  expenditures  for  inter- 
locking signal  apparatus,  switching  engines,  and  the  service  and 
supplies  of  same. 

Fourth. — The  terminal  station  on  this  plan  is  confined,  without 
the  slightest  disadvantage,  to  the  easterly  line  of  Chatham  Street, 
thereby  setting  at  rest,  and  removing  the  necessity  for,  the  vexed 
question  of  the  Bridge  over  Chatham  Street  and  Centre  Street. 

Fifth. — It  brings  the  Bridge  trains  nearer  to  the  passengers  and 
requires  a  shorter  distance  to  be  walked  to  reach  the  cars  than  is 
possible  by  any  other  plan. 

Sixth. — It  affords  more  spacious  and  commodious  station  and 
platform  areas,  and  a  greater  number  and  ease  of  entrances  and 
exits,  than  can  be  had  on  any  other  plan. 

Seventh. — It  admits  of  such  a  disposition  of  the  cars  of  a  train 
in  the  station,  that  all  are  of  equally  convenient  access  to  passengers, 
thereby  promoting  equality  of  car  loading  in  a  greater  degree  than 
can  possibly  be  obtained  in  east  and  west  longitudinally  planned 
stations. 

Eighth. — It  presents  a  ground  plan  of  symmetrical  shape  and  pro- 
portions, singularly  well  adapted  for  a  superstructure  of  dignified 
beauty,  and  susceptible  of  a  grandeur  of  architectural  treatment  in 
harmony  with  the  majestic  proportion  of  the  great  bridge  structure, 
to  which  it  should  form  a  fitting  climax,  worthy  of  the  two  great 
cities  it  links  together. 


IO 


ATinth. — It  is  equally  well  adapted  to  the  working  of  trains  of  any 
number  of  cars  up  to  the  maximum  provided  for,  and  can,  without 
any  very  serious  constructive  difficulties,  be  erected  around  and  over 
the  existing  station  building,  leaving  it  intact  and  in  use,  without 
much  modification,  until  the  new  structure  is  nearly  completed. 

The  maximum  capacity  of  the  Bridge  railway  can  only  be  attained 
by  increasing  the  number  of  cars  per  train  to  the  limit  most  desirable 
in  actual  service  (which  experience  in  operating  them  alone  can 
demonstrate),  and  in  fixing  the  "headway"  intervals  as  short  as 
absolute  safety  requires  for  handling  trains  of  increasing  lengths.  It 
is,  therefore,  obviously,  true  economic  policy  to  make  the  cable 
plant,  motive  power  and  terminal  facilities  equal  to  that  amount  of 
train  service.  Such  a  terminal  for  the  New  York  end,  as  to  which 
alone  we  are  instructed  to  report,  is  the  one  we  now  recommend, 
and  we  also  recommend  that  if  the  existing  cable  plant  and  motive 
power  is  not  adequate  to  that  amount  of  duty,  steps  should  be 
taken  to  ultimately  increase  it  up  to  that  standard. 

In  regard  to  operating  long  trains,  we  are  decidedly  of  the  opinion 
that  in  order  to  secure  proper,  certain  and  safe  operation,  a  similar 
system  should  be  adopted  to  that  now  accepted  and  practised  as  the 
best  by  all  first-class  surface  railroads,  under  which  it  is  found  to  be 
perfectly  practicable  to  move  trains  of  equal  and  much  greater 
length  and  weight  with  entire  safety,  at  speeds  six  times  faster  than 
the  maximum  found  to  be  expedient  for  your  train  service,  by 
placing  the  sole  control  of  the  train  under  one  man  at  the  head  of 
the  train.  To  accomplish  this,  we  recommend  that  the  leading  car 
of  every  train  shall  have  a  compartment  fenced  off  at  its  front  end, — 
or  a  separate  small  car  may  be  attached  to  the  head  of  each  train, — 
constituting  the  counterpart  of  the  Engineer's  u  cab  "  on  an  ordinary 
locomotive,  in  which  shall  be  located  mechanism  for  operating,  by 
means  of  air  pressure  or  electricity,  the  grips  and  brakes  of  every 
car  in  the  train  ;  such  mechanism  so  reciprocally  interlocked  that 
the  grips  must  be  released  before  the  brakes  can  be  applied,  and 
vice  versa,  that  the  grips  cannot  be  applied  before  the  brakes  are 
released  ;  and  so  mechanically  arranged  that  the  grips  shall  be 
released,  and  the  brakes  applied  on  each  car  consecutively  from  the 
rear  to  the  head  of  the  trains,  and  certainly  not  the  reverse  of  this, 
from  the  head  to  the  rear,  as  suggested  by  Mr.  Wellington.  One 
guard  or  engineer  to  have  entire  control  of  the  whole  train,  with  an 
assistant  near  him  in  the  "cab"  as  a  precaution  in  case  of  sudden 
sickness,  accident,  or  other  inability  to  perform  his  duties,  as  is  now 
similarly  provided  by  the  second  wheelman  in  the  pilot-houses  of 
ferry-boats,  and  by  the  fireman  in  the  locomotive  cab. 

Referring  to  your  request  "  to  be  advised  what  safety  appliances 


1 1 

are  necessary  in  connection  with  the  system  we  recommend."  we 
would  respectfully  state  that  in  our  judgment  a  complete  system  of 
block  signals  should  be  provided  over  the  entire  length  of  both 
tracks,  with  signal  targets  or  semaphores  erected  at  intervals  of  about 
the  average  headway  length  of  the  trains,  operated  automatically  by 
the  cars  passing  over  "  track  levers,"  so  that  the  guard  in  charge  of 
every  train  will  be  at  once  signalled  whenever  the  next  preceeding 
train  has  failed  to  preserve  its  proper  headway  interval,  and  also  for 
the  purpose  of  properly  signalling  and  giving  due  notice,  should 
necessity  arise  for  reducing  speed,  or  stopping  trains,  when  approach- 
ing the  terminal  stations.  There  is  no  mechanical  difficulty  in 
devising  such  a  system,  as  it  would  not  differ  materially  from  systems 
already  in  very  successful  operation  on  other  railroad  lines,  and  for 
which  any  competent  signal  engineer  can  prepare  details  and  speci- 
fications. The  actuating  medium  can  be  either  hydraulic,  electric, 
or  mechanical,  by  simple  levers,  cranks  and  counterweights,  as  may 
be  found  most  adapted,  on  study,  to  the  special  requirements  of  the 
Bridge  railway  and  traffic. 

We  also  strongly  recommend  that  all  trains  be  equipped  through- 
out with  the  Westinghouse  continuous  automatic  train  brakes, 
operated  from  the  leading  "cab,"  as  above  described,  and  which  can 
also  be  applied  from  every  car  in  the  train. 

We  are  also  decidedly  of  the  opinion  that  an  immediate  modifi- 
cation in  the  present  cable  plant  and  grips  should  be  made,  that  will 
provide  the  ability  in  any  car  to  slacken  speed,  release  and  again 
pick  up  the  cable  at  any  and  all  points  of  its  passage  over  the  rail- 
way. 

We  transmit  herewith  a  copy  of  Mr.  Wellington's  description, 
addressed  to  us,  of  his  proposed  plan  and  views,  with  its  illustrative 
maps  and  diagrams,  for  the  purpose  of  laying  before  you  his  own 
arguments  in  advocacy  of  it,  for  such  consideration  only  as  you  may 
in  your  own  judgment  deem  them  entitled  to. 

Finally,  we  desire  to  draw  your  attention  to  the  fact  that,  should 
the  time  ever  come  when  the  maximum  capacity  of  the  present  cable 
railway  is  exhausted,  with  a  still  increasing  demand  for  additional 
service,  there  remains  to  you  the  ability  to  construct  an  entire  dupli- 
cate set  of  cable  railroad  tracks,  carried  on  top  of  the  present  trusses, 
or  over  the  roadways,  or  over  both,  as  might  be  found  most  expe- 
dient in  working  out  detail  plans.  These  tracks  would  be  admirably 
adapted  for  connections  with  the  Brooklyn  elevated  railroads,  and 
could  be  most  conveniently  accommodated  with  a  "  terminal  "  on  a 
second  story,  above  the  tracks  of  the  present  cable  railroad,  in  the 
same  building  recommended  in  this  report,  and  into  which  the  tracks 
of  the  Manhattan  Elevated  Railroad  could  also  be  conveniently 


12 


taken,  thus  giving  direct  connection  with  the  Brooklyn  elevated  rail- 
road system,  and  enabling  an  entire  removal  of  the  present  terminal 
station  of  the  Manhattan  Elevated  Railroad  over  Chatham  Street. 
And  should  the  project  of  underground  lines  to  the  City  Hall. 
New  York,  be  finally  decided  upon,  no  better  site  for  a  "terminal  " 
could  be  desired  than  that  afforded  by  the  space  beneath,  and 
enclosed  by  the  foundation  walls  of  the  terminal  station  herein 
recommended  ;  provision  for  which  probable  future  requirements 
should  be  made  in  preparing  the  working  plans  for  it. 
All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted  by 

Your  obedient  servants, 

Walter  Katte,  Chairman. 


j   r{  Walter  Katte, 
l  he  Board  of  )  T  wt  a 

77  )  JUL1US  W-  Adams 

experts:     |  y0SEPH  Crawford. 


APPENDIX. 


[Report  submitted  to  the  Board  of  Experts,  by  Mr.  A.  M.  Wellington,  M.  Am. 
Soc.  C.  E.,  describing  the  recommended  plan.] 


To  Messrs.  Walter  Katte,  )     T,      ,    r  ^  XT      A7  , 

j  ttt   *  (      Board  of  Experts,  New  York 

Julius  W.  Adams,  r        ^  xT.,  ' 

i  r-  \  and  Brooklyn  Bridge. 

Joseph  Crawford.  )  3  b 

In  accordance  with  your  request  the  undersigned  herewith  sub- 
mits the  following  abstract  of  what  is,  in  his  opinion,  the  best 
method  of  increasing  the  transit  facilities  of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge. 

It  is  believed  that  the  truth  must  be  faced  at  the  outset  that,  as  a 
not  unnatural  effect  of  the  then  existing  conditions,  the  original  ex- 
penditures for  transit  facilities  were  unduly  skimped,  and  the  ar- 
rangements then  made  entirely  inadequate  for  permanent  require- 
ments, not  only  in  one  but  in  several  respects.  They  were  the  last 
detail  of  the  bridge  to  be  studied,  and  seemed  (and  were)  at  the 
time  a  comparatively  minor  matter.  The  public  impatience  to  have 
the  bridge  opened,  and  reluctance  to  spend  more  money,  was  great. 
The  transit  problem  was  an  entirely  new  one,  and  its  future  magni- 
tude hardly  guessed  at,  as  well  as  an  entirely  different  one  in  its 
nature  from  that  of  bridge  construction.  It  is  not  surprising, 
therefore,  that  there  should  have  been  some  mistakes. 

It  will  appear  still  less  surprising  if  we  remember  that  even  now, 
with  all  the  aid  of  experience,  it  does  not  seem  to  be  generally  recog- 
nized or  considered  that  the  existing  facilities  are  inadequate  in 
more  than  one  respect,  car  carrying  capacity,  whereas  they  are,  in 
fact,  almost  equally  inadequate  in  respect  to  at  least  three  funda- 
mental requirements,  viz.: 

Requirement  A.    Car  carrying  capacity,  as  stated. 

Requirement  B.  Means  of  entrance  from  the  street  to  the  outgoing 
platform,  which  is  now  of  necessity  through  ticket  gates  at  one 
end  only  of  platforms  constantly  growing  longer. 

Requirement  C.  Means  of  approach  from  the  city  streets  to  the  station, 
which  is  now  only  by  the  sidewalks  of  Park  Row  and  Nassau 
Street,  which  even  before  the  bridge  and  New  York  Elevated 
Railway  were  built,  were  among  the  most  crowded  in  the  city, 
and  have  now  become  intolerably  overcrowded. 


It  will  be  rather  worse  than  useless  to  attempt  to  increase  present 
facilities  largely  in  any  one  of  these  three  respects  without  increasing 
them  in  the  other  two  respects  correspondingly.  It  is,  therefore, 
deemed  a  fortunate  fact  that  the  plan  which,  it  is  believed,  will 
demonstrably  give  by  much  the  largest  car-carrying  capacity,  a  con- 
tinuous circulating  system  of  the  type  herein  suggested,  will  also 
readily  enable  the  facilities  in  the  two  other  respects  to  be  enlarged 
correspondingly,  at  comparatively  trifling  extra  cost. 

To  the  three  purely  utilitarian  ends  just  specified  should  properly 
be  added  another,  viz.: 

Requirement  D.     I?nprovement  in  the  architectural  appearance  and 
surroundings  of  the  termini. 

It  is  believed  that  both  business  judgment  and  proper  self-respect 
should  lead  the  people  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  to  regard  the 
need  for  improvement  in  this  respect  as  no  less  peremptory  than 
in  respect  to  the  other  three.  The  Brooklyn  Bridge  is  the  front  door 
to  the  City  of  Brooklyn,  which  is  a  city  seeking  more  tenants,  and 
there  are  the  same  pecuniary  motives  for  making  the  entrance  to  it 
commodious  and  attractive  as  obtain  in  the  case  of  single  build- 
ings; but  independently  of  this,  "a  decent  respect  for  the  opinion  of 
mankind  "  and  for  the  good  name  of  two  such  wealthy  cities  should 
lead  them,  from  mere  self-respect,  to  make  such  a  terminus  of  as 
fine  architectural  appearance  as  possible,  even  if  there  were  no 
money  in  doing  it,  and  even  if  the  building  stood  by  itself,  instead 
of  being  a  component  part  of  one  of  the  grandest  structures  in  the 
world,  which  seems  to  demand  more  dignified  appurtenances  from  a 
civilized  people. 

At  present  the  whole  terminal  arrangements  and  surroundings  are 
shabby  and  offensive  to  the  last  degree.  Instead  of  being  in  any  re- 
spect worthy  of  the  structure,  or  even  inoffensive,  the  combination 
of  the  wooden  elevated  station,  contracted  iron  terminal  shed,  tun- 
nel-like entrance  to  promenade,  nondescript  wood  and  iron  bridge 
over  Park  Row,  butting  up  against  the  shabby  Registry  building  ; 
together  with  the  mud,  dirt  and  crowd,  the  liquor  saloons  on  each 
side  of  the  terminal  shed  and  the  torrents  of  water  which  must  be 
waded  through  in  the  rain,  make  it  one  of  the  most  undignified  and 
unpleasant  localities  to  be  found  in  any  part  of  either  city.  This 
disagreeable  effect  has  been  added  to  lately  by  the  wooden  stairways 
which  have  been  put  in.  and  especially  by  the  bracketed  excres- 
cences to  extend  the  platforms  over  the  roadway  which  have  been 
added  (of  course  necessarily)  to  the  present  buildings,  but  have  de- 
stroyed what  little  symmetry  remained  to  it. 


15 


PLAN    PROPOSED.  * 

The  plan  proposed  to  meet  all  the  conditions  heretofore  specified 
is  in  brief  this  :  To  spread  the  two  cable  tracks  a  little  at  each 
end  and  connect  them  by  a  horse-shoe  curve  of  90  feet  radius 
extending  nearly  to  the  street  line  of  Park  Row.  The  radius  might 
be  considerably  shorter,  as  more  fully  pointed  out  below,  except 
that  it  would  not  give  a  sufficiently  commodious  station  for  perma- 
nent requirements  and  decent  architectural  effect,  corresponding  to 
the  structure  and  location. 

To  erect  a  station  similar  to  Fig.  2,  herewith  to  enclose  under  one 
roof  the  entire  terminal  horse-shoe  thus  formed.  A  similar  station 
in  essentials  to  be  erected  at  the  Brooklyn  terminus. 

To  run  trains  of  18  cars  (less  of  course  until  all  are  needed)  into 
this  station,  in  a  manner  more  fully  described  below,  which  when 
stopped,  completely  fill  the  station  in  horse-shoe  form,  with  head  and 
rear  cars  opposite  each  other. 

Entrance  to  train  to  be  from  inside  platform  only  ;  exit  from  the 
outside  platform  only.  The  cars  to  have  entrance  and  exit  doors 
arranged  in  a  peculiar  way,  to  be  shortly  described,  to  facilitate  quick 
loading  and  unloading  on  either  the  curved  or  straight  track. 

DESCRIPTION   OF  STATION. 

The  extreme  dimensions  of  the  proposed  building  are  434  feet 
long  by  288  feet  wide,  of  horse-shoe  form.  At  the  east  end  it  termin- 
ates at  the  west  face  line  of  the  Rose  Street  arch  ;  at  the  west  end 
at  the  sidewalk  line  of  Park  Row.  The  switching  tracks  which  now 
extend  halfway  across  the  street  are  done  away  with.  This  station, 
although  no  longer  than  the  present  terminal,  including  the  rear 
extension  of  tracks  over  Park  Row,  holds  a  train  of  18  cars  50  feet 
long,  or  900  feet  in  all  with  room  to  spare  at  each  end  ;  it  can  be 
arranged  to  hold  1,000  feet  of  train.  Ten  of  the  18  cars  unload 
nearer  to  Park  Row  than  at  the  present  platform  for  three  car  trains. 

The  roadways  are  carried  within  the  building  in  covered  ways,  as 
shown,  20  feet  wide,  as  now.  This  enables  the  toll  gates  to  be  under 
cover,  and  utilizes  the  space  above  the  roadways  as  additional  plat- 
form space  for  the  upper  tracks,  where  it  is  most  likely  to  be  needed. 
All  the  stone  and  brick  work  of  the  approaches  west  of  the  Rose 
Street  arch  are  dispensed  with  and  can  be  removed,  except  as  they 
can  usefully  be  made  a  part  of  the  plans  for  the  terminal  building. 

*  The  plan  proposed  in  the  original  draft  in  this  report  was  for  the  smaller 
station  shown  in  Fig.  I,  extending  no  further  east  than  the  east  line  of  the  present 
building  and  accommodating  only  14  instead  of  18  cars,  the  extreme  dimensions 
being  350  X  190  feet,  with  the  roadways  outside,  instead  of  434  X  288  feet  with 
the  roadways  inside.  The  Rotunda  of  the  smaller  station  was  only  100  feet  in 
diameter  instead  of  135  feet.  The  larger  station,  however,  appearing  to  be  for 
many  reasons  preferable,  this  description  has  been  changed  to  correspond  with  it. 


i6 


The  building  is  widened  slightly  at  the  easterly  end  for  the  double 
end  of  obtaining  desirable  platform  space,  and  bringing  its  side 
parallel  with  Frankfort  Street.  The  entire  small  triangle  of  build- 
ings between  the  bridge  on  the  north,  and  Frankfort  Street  on  the 
south,  must  practically  be  acquired,  but  besides  giving  ample  room 
for  the  station,  and  enabling  its  side  as  well  as  ends  to  front  on  a 
street,  the  area  will  suffice  to  effect  two  highly  desirable  street  im- 
provements, viz.,  to  widen  Frankfort  Street  to  60  feet  from  35  feet, 
giving  a  new,  wide  street  from  the  City  Hall  to  Franklin  Square, 
and  to  give  the  neceesary  approach  to  the  proposed  new  street 
between  Nassau  and  William  Streets  by  cutting  off  a  triangle  where 
French's  Hotel  now  stands.  The  total  cost  of  all  the  land  now 
owned  at  the  terminus,  which  included  the  old  Staats  Zeitung 
building,  was  under  $500,000.  Assessing  a  proper  proportion  of  the 
cost  of  the  land  on  the  property  benefited  by  the  street  improve- 
ments, it  is  believed  that  $500,000  should  cover  the  cost  of  the 
additional  land  properly  chargeable  to  the  terminus. 

The  station  terminates  at  the  west  end  in  a  large  rotunda,  which 
is  the  principal  feature  of  the  building.  This  rotunda  is  bounded 
on  the  outside  by  an  iron  fence  to  the  loading  or  outgoing  platform, 
and  this  fence  is  continued  parallel  to  the  track  along  the  entire  900 
feet  of  track  within  the  building.  In  this  fence  are  placed  18  or  more 
ticket  wickets  approximately  opposite  to  the  central  entrance  door  of 
each  car,  the  windows  for  sale  of  tickets  being  at  some  interior  point. 

By  these  arrangements  the  entrance  to  the  outgoing  platform  is 
from  the  side  at  all  points  instead  of  from  the  ends  only  (see  Fig.  7), 
— a  very  important  and  radical  distinction  which  at  once  removes  all 
those  difficulties  in  getting  a  large  crowd  of  passengers  through  the 
wickets  to  the  loading  platform,  which  must  always  exist  in  any  form 
of  end  entrance  to  long  platforms.  There  remains  only  the  difficulty 
in  getting  them  from  the  streets  into  the  interior  space,  amply  pro- 
vided for  below. 

The  diameter  of  the  rotunda,  etc.,  is  roughly  as  follows  : 

Rotunda  proper,  constituting  the  beginning  of  promenade,  as  well  as 
an  entrance  space  for  car  passengers,  and  bounded  on  the  outside 


by  fence  to  outgoing  platform,     .......  135  ft. 

Center  line  of  track,   180  " 

Outside  of  Incoming  Platform,  at  center  of  rotunda,  .        .  220  " 

Outside  of  Roadways,  .  260  " 

Extreme  width  of  building,  west  end,     ......  288  " 

"  "  "         east  end,         .....  163  " 


The  rotunda  should  be  an  entirely  open  space,  unless  for  some 
central  news  stand  or  ticket-selling  booth,  with  free  access  to  it 
from  all  street  entrances.  The  promenade  starts  from  it  on  the 
same  level  and  extends  east  through  the  center  of  the  building,  but  it 
does  not  necessarily  nor  preferably  become  a  distinct  feature  of  the 


^Iwwmu'  .ippro^m  it-iv  the  Prefer. U.]..  A-r .uiyements  of  New  York  Terminal  of 
(viz     18-car  Maximum  Trains.  90-ft.  Terminal  Radius,  135-It  Rotunda' 
As  proposed  by  A.  M.  WELLINGTON,  M.  Am  Soc.  C.  E. 


%  o  2  g  & 

|  s  g  g  s 

i-  o  (-  jc 

U  «)  f,  o)  «  . 
>  »-  £  c 
<U    -    <U   C  ~ 

Si**** 

tfl  &  ^3  (3 
2,C      to  to  v 

; "  B-  . 


>   <U  t; 


B  O 


-   g  TO 

W13 


p 

e    .2  c  c  c 

o  >^  >  «\ 
cj  -r        1  ? 

M  2  c  -  ^  £ 

S       .2   3   «  O 

§  C  M.£J  z  •_ 

TO  _f-         ^  3  C 

_£    v  '~  5 

cj;,t;  i 

2  w  1/3  J2  cs 

to  3  c  f  ~*  v 

v  2  »  £  2  « 

u  O-—-  -  £ 

«  2 1  t*S  - 

<=  £  ~  £  2  c 

o  w 

O     •  iJ 


c 


£  .3 


0 


to  O 


TO 


fcjc  w  5  - 
tuo—  si  c 

3  TO     -  O 


2   *r-  TO 


O    U  h 


J-  »-i  c/s  rv 


1 8 


station,  so  as  to  separate  the  promenade  from  the  car  passengers, 
until  near  the  east  end  of  the  station,  especially  if  promenade  tolls 
are  to  be  abolished,  as  seems  probable.  The  large  central  space 
will  afford  needed  room  not  now  existing  nor  obtainable  for  eleva- 
tors and  stairways  from  the  three  streets  which  pass  directly  below 
the  station,  but  which  are  now  entirely  useless  as  means  of  entrance 
from  lack  of  any  central  space  in  the  station  to  provide  for  such 
entrance.  It  will  also  provide  ample  and  needed  space  for  waiting 
and  parcel  rooms,  news  and  cigar  stands,  lavatories  and  water 
closets,  light  refreshments,  and  offices  of  various  kinds,  as  well  as  for 
stairways  and  elevators  to  the  upper  tracks  suggested  below,  when 
and  if  constructed. 

With  any  ordinary  skill  in  design  such  a  building  can  hardly 
fail  to  be  a  stately  and  dignified  structure,  and  at  a  moderate  cost, 
in  the  hands  of  good  architects,  it  can  be  made  one  of  the  finest 

K 


Fig.  4. 

Rough  Sketch  of  Rear  End  of  the  Smaller  (14-car)  Station,  showing  an  alternate 
type  of  roof  and  dome  construction,  suggested  to  the  writer  by  Mr.  Wm.W.  Kent, 
Architect. 

[The  rear  view  of  the  smaller  station  was  selected  only  because  more  easily 
sketched.  The  rear  view  of  the  larger  station,  or  the  front  view  of  either  station, 
will  be  much  more  imposing  and  attractive.] 

terminals  in  the  world,  in  broad  contrast  to  the  shabby  arrangements 
which  are  now  made  here  and  elsewhere  for  rapid  transit. 

Figs.  3  and  4  are  rude  and  hasty  sketches  giving  a  general  idea 
only  of  the  capabilities  of  the  plan.  A  higher  roof  east  of  the 
rotunda  may  be  preferable. 

HANDLING   OF  TRAFFIC. 

As  the  12  to  18-car  trains  shown  in  Fig.  2  enter  it,  the  leading 
cars  drop  the  cable  in  succession,  or  simultaneously  (the  rear  ones 


'9 


still  keeping  hold)  and  sweep  through  and  around  the  horse-shoe 
curve  at  precisely  cable  speed  until  the  head  of  the  train  is  within  two 
or  three  car-lengths  of  the  end  of  the  south  arm  of  the  station. 

Then  for  the  first  time  the  whole  train  drops  the  cable,  and  the 
air  brakes  are  applied,  bringing  it  to  a  stop  in  the  position  shown. 

[This  is  on  the  assumption  that  the  cable  is  not  to  pass  around  the  horse-shoe 
curves  direct,  as  will  probably  be  expedient.  If  it  does,  the  cars  will  all  release 
and  grip  the  cable  at  once.] 

It  will  not  be  expedient  with  such  long  trains  to  have  independent 
brakes  on  each  car.  They  must  be  applicable  to  the  whole  train  from 
any  point,  as  in  general  railway  practice.  It  is  desirable  also  that 
the  grips  should  be  rearranged,  first,  so  that  they  may  be  applied, 
released  and  applied  again  at  any  point  (instead  of  at  the  termini 
only),  and  secondly,  to  work  by  air,  inter-dependently  with  the  brakes, 
by  the  same  brake-handle  and  valve,  so  that  moving  the  brake- 
handle  to  one  side  releases  brakes  and  applies  grips,  moving  it  to  the 
other  releases  grips  and  applies  brakes,  etc.  A  single  man  on  any 
car  can  then  handle  the  whole  train  by  one  brake-handle,  and  any 
passenger  on  any  car  can  stop  the  whole  train  in  an  emergency,  as 
on  other  railway  lines.  The  necessary  appliances  to  this  end  are 
simple  and  entirely  practicable,  and  will  make  the  handling  of  18  or 
20-car  trains  both  simpler  and  safer  than  the  present  system  for  3-car 
trains,  which  has  a  certain  unavoidable  element  of  danger  in  it, 
(1)  from  the  confusion  resulting  in  dropping  back  to  the  station  to 
resume  the  cable  after  once  dropping  it,  and  (2)  in  the  resulting  fear 
of  dropping  the  cable  at  the  first  sign  of  danger,  or  until  it  is  seen  to 
be  absolutely  unavoidable,  when  it  may  be  too  late. 

Switchi?ig  and  switching  engines  are  entirely  do?ie  away  with  by  this 
plan,  and  all  expenses  therefor  are  saved. 

Five  engines  and  four  crews  now  constantly  employed  are  thus 
released,  saving  at  the  lowest  estimate  $100  per  day,  or  $36,500  per 
year,  which  is  interest  at  3  per  cent,  on  over  $1,000,000.  All  expense 
for  interlocking  apparatus  is  likewise  saved,  since  there  are  no 
switches  to  interlock.  The  total  direct  and  indirect  expense  for 
switching  is  fully  $50,000.  These  savings  alone  should  far  more  than 
pay  interest  at  3  per  cent  on  the  entire  cost  of  carrying  through  the 
improvements  suggested  herein  in  thoroughly  good  shape. 

But  the  improved  system  of  handling  trains  and  grips  will  also 
make  possible  a  very  large  economy  in  cost  of  train  service  over 
present  methods.  The  preferable  arrangements  will  be  these  :  18 
platform  men  at  each  terminus,  one  for  each  car,  will  open  and  shut 
all  the  doors  at  once  as  each  train  arrives  and  departs,  and  guide  and 
instruct  the  passengers.  Three  trainmen  only,  one  at  the  head,  one 
at  the  rear,  and  another  merely  ornamental  and  precautionary,  will 


20 


handle  each  train.  Again,  no  trains  are  out  of  service  switching, 
whereas  now  there  must  be  two  trains  more  at  each  end,  one  loading 
and  one  switching,  while  a  third  is  unloading.  Seven  trains  will 
therefore  do  the  same  work  which  would  require  n,  by  a  mere  expan- 
sion of  the  present  switching  system.  To  run  18-car  trains  at  2^- 
minute  intervals  by  present  methods  would  require  a  force  of  at  least 
229  train  and  platform  men,  whereas  with  the  circulating  tracks  and 
better  grip  and  brake  system  57  only  will  be  required  to  give  a  better 
service,  as  thus  : 

No.  of 
Trainmen. 

Present  System  Expanded  :    n  trains  in  service  (7  doing  the 
work,  as  per  Fig.  7,  and  4  constantly  out  of  service  switching), 


with  19  trainmen  for  each  18-car  train,  .....  209 
Platform  guards,  say  only  10  at  each  terminus,      ...  20 

229 

Proposed  System  :    7  trains  with  3  trainmen  each,    ...  21 
18  platform  doormen  at  each  terminus,  ....  36  57 

Saving  in  employes  (over  75  per  cent.),  .....  172 
Seats  per  train-hand,  present  system  (expanded  to  18-car  trains), 

18X42X7—229,       .   23 

Seats  per  train-hand,  present  system  (3-car  trains),  about          .  20 

Seats  per  train-hand,  proposed  system,  18X56X7-; — 57,      •       •  124 


In  other  words,  each  train  employe  will  have  more  than  six  times 
the  transporting  efficiency  that  he  has  now.  At  $45  per  month  each, 
this  represents  a  saving  of  $92,880  per  year  over  a  simple  expansion 
of  the  present  system  of  handling  trains,  allowing  such  expansion  to 
be  possible. 

As  part  of  the  train  at  least  is  always  over  the  cable,  the  train 
can  be  moved  slightly  within  the  station  or  started  at  any  time, 
in  any  position.  Should  a  car  be  disabled  it  is  uncoupled  from 
the  rear  cars,  the  head  of  the  train  grips  the  cable  and  pulls  out 
a  sufficient  distance,  and  then  the  disabled  car  is  dropped  back  by 
gravity  on  to  the  "disabled  car  switch"  shown  below  the  south  track. 
The  head  of  the  train  then  drops  back  by  gravity  and  couples  on 
to  the  rear  of  the  train,  and  the  whole  train  proceeds. 

The  car  may  be  repaired  on  the  siding  and  taken  out  in  a  simi- 
lar way,  or  an  engine  sent  around  after  it. 

This  disabled  car  switch,  and  a  corresponding  one  at  the  Brook- 
lyn end,  are  the  only  switches  in  the  whole  track.  As  they  are 
rarely  used,  and  hence  can  be  readily  arranged  to  make  no  break  in 
main  rails  whatever,  either  for  frog  or  switch,  they  can  only  become 
a  source  of  danger  by  gross  carelessness,  making  this  plan  far  safer 
than  any  other  can  be  in  that  respect. 

The  number  of  trains  in  service  should  remain  always  the  same  (7) 
in  both  rush  hours  and  off  hours.  The  full  number  of  cars,  say  12 
or  20,  is  run  only  during  the  two  rush  hours  (see  traffic  diagrams). 


2  I 


When  these  are  over,  half  the  cars  are  uncoupled  from  the  rest,  just 
before  entering  the  Brooklyn  terminus,  held  back  a  couple  of  car- 
lengths  by  the  brakes,  just  long  enough  to  throw  a  switch,  and  run 
out  to  the  present  storage  tracks  by  gravity,  where  they  are  carefully 
inspected.  An  hour  or  so  later,  half  of  the  remaining  cars  are  run 
out  of  service  in  the  same  way,  leaving  only  a  quarter  of  the  cars  in 
each  train  in  service  for  about  14  off  hours  of  the  24.  The  cars  are 
put  back  into  service  in  the  same  way,  as  the  rush  hours  approach, 
by  a  single  switch  engine  kept  on  hand  for  that  purpose  and  for 
emergencies,  or  they  may  be  put  into  service  as  well  as  out  of  it  by 
gravity. 

This  process  is  a  perfectly  simple  one,  and  need  not  delay  the 
routine  of  train  service  by  a  second.  The  average  time  of  service 
for  each  car  is  only  ioj4  hours  per  day,  leaving  ample  time  for 
inspection  and  repairs. 

To  facilitate  the  above  method  of  operating,  and  for  other  reasons, 
it  is  desirable  to  have  the  tracks  of  both  termini  on  a  down  grade 
within  the  station,  bringing  them  but  little  more  than  half  as  high  as 
now  above  Chatham  Street  sidewalk  on  the  New  York  side,  and  nearly 
at  the  level  of  the  sidewalks  at  the  corner  of  Washington  and  Sands 
Streets  on  the  Brooklyn  side.  The  horse-shoe  form  makes  this  possi- 
ble, for  whether  the  plane  of  the  horse-shoe  track  within  the  building 
be  a  level  or  on  such  a  down  grade,  a  train  standing  on  it  in  the 
position  shown  starts  from  it,  mechanically,  as  from  a  level  grade. 
It  is  the  locus  of  the  centre  of  gravity  of  the  train  which  fixes  the 
equivalent  grade  under  these  unusual  conditions  ;  the  dip  which 
hinders  one-half  of  the  train  helps  the  other.  .  By  having  the  north 
track  (at  New  York)  slightly  higher  than  the  south,  or  by  having  the 
train  stop  with  more  cars  on  the  north  track  than  on  the  south,  the 
train  will  start  as  from  a  down  grade.  This  will  be  seen  more  clearly 
by  imagining  the  horse-shoe  curve  developed  into  a  straight  line. 
The  station  as  a  whole,  therefore,  may  have  a  very  decided  dip  against 
starting  trains,  and  yet  trains  start  with  the  equivalent  of  any  desired 
favoring  grade,  by  making  the  north  arm  of  the  horse-shoe  higher,  or 
the  south  arm  lower. 

The  Rotunda  should  be  made  level.  It  may  be  desirable  to  have  a 
slight  down  grade  on  the  horseshoe  curve,  in  order  to  balance  its 
extra  resistance  as  nearly  as  may  be,  and  give  a  perfectly  smooth 
motion  around  it;  but  this  need  be  but  slight,  as  follows  : 

THE  HORSE-SHOE  CURVE. 

The  proposed  radius  of  90  feet  offers  no  impediment  whatever. 
The  elevated  lines  have  a  number  of  curves  of  90  feet  radius, 
operated  by  locomotives  in  the  ordinary  way  at  6  to  10  miles  per 


hour  (the  guard  rails  being  well  greased  however).  The  rails  last 
about  1 8  months,  and  no  trouble  or  threatened  trouble  has  ever 
arisen  from  them. 

These  horse-shoe  curves,  however,  are  not  to  be  passed  over  by 
locomotives,  and  as  the  car  trucks  are  but  little  longer  than  a  freight 
car  truck  there  is  no  reason  why  the  cars  should  not  go  over  any 
curve  that  freight  cars  will,  and  freight  cars  pass  curves  every  day 
in  the  streets  of  New  York  and  elsewhere  of  less  than  50  feet  radius. 
The  only  reason,  therefore,  for  proposing  even  so  large  a  radius  as 
90  feet  is  to  obtain  a  station  area  which  will  be  adequate  for  all  time 
to  the  requirements.  Otherwise  the  curve  might  be  considerably 
sharper,  although  of  course  an  easy  radius  is  always  preferable. 

Whatever  the  radius,  it  makes  no  difference  what  the  speed  is, 
provided  the  outer  rail  can  be  elevated  to  precisely  correspond  to 
the  speed  and  the  radius  of  the  curve  at  every  point.  By  the  plans 
here  outlined  every  train  will  have  the  constant  speed  of  the  cable 
at  all  times,  and  by  connecting  the  sharp  curve  to  the  tangents  by 
transition  curves  of  gradually  increasing  radius,  as  it  is  proposed  to 
do,  the  elevation  may  always  be  precisely  adapted  to  the  radius  of 
the  curve  as  well. 

Under  these  conditions,  with  precisely  uniform  speed,  and  precise 
adaptation  of  the  elevation  to  the  speed  and  radius  of  curve,  it  will 
not  be  possible  for  either  a  standing  or  sitting  passenger  to  tell  by 
the  motion  of  the  train,  with  his  eyes  shut,  that  there  is  a  curve  there 
at  all.  The  lurching  sensation  in  ordinary  railway  travel  arises 
chiefly  from  the  fact  that  the  speed  of  no  two  trains  are  alike  ;  and 
hence,  it  is  not  possible  to  adapt  the  elevation  to  them,  and  in  part 
from  the  absence  of  transition  spirals  to  connect  the  curves  and  tan- 
gents, which  are  only  used  in  the  best  modern  work.  The  elevation 
of  outer  rail  required  on  the  horse-shoe  curve  is  5^  inches,  for  10 
miles  per  hour. 

It  is  also  proposed,  however,  not  from  necessity,  but  for  greater 
economy  and  convenience,  to  further  facilitate  the  operation  of  these 
horse-shoe  curves  by  laying  a  broad  outside  rail  having  a  trough  or 
broad  flat  groove  coated  with  a  thick  grease,  and  to  provide  the 
wheels  on  one  side  of  each  axle,  with  a  broad  flat  flange  resembling 
a  narrow  duplicate  tread,  which  rides  in  the  bottom  of  this  groove, 
and  is  of  an  outside  diameter  to  correspond  to  the  difference  of  radius 
of  the  outside  and  inside  rail. 

This  gives  in  effect  an  outside  larger  wheel  used  on  the  sharp 
curve  only,  which  carries  the  main  tread  of  the  wheel  on  which  the 
brake-shoes  act,  clear  of  the  grease.  The  curve  resistance,  and  extra 
rail  wear  as  well,  will  be  in  this  way  almost  entirely  eliminated. 
What  remains  will  be  of  no  serious  moment. 


23 


THE   CARS   AND  PLATFORMS. 

The  cars  which  stand  on  the  horse-shoe  curve  have  their  ends 
thrown  far  away  from  the  loading  platform,  as  shown  in  Fig.  5  ;  so 
far  away  (4  or  5  ft.)  that  with  ordinary  end-platform  cars  and  very 
numerous  trains  it  would  hardly  be  feasible  to  load  and  unload  on 
the  curve  at  all. 

The  most  essential  feature  of  the  present  plan  is  the  arrangement 
of  car  doors,  by  which  it  is  made  indifferent  whether  the  cars  stand 
on  curve  or  tangents  for  either  loading  or  unloading,  which  is  as 
follows  (see  Fig.  5)  : 


Fig.  6 


The  inside  platform  is  used  for  loading,  or  for  outgoing  passengers, 
only.  The  ?niddle  of  every  car,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  sketch,  is  always 
adjacent  to  this  platform,  whether  on  curves  or  tangents.  A  central 
door  is  accordingly  placed  on  this  side,  used  for  entrance  only.  The 
end  doors  or  end-platform  gates  on  this  side  of  the  car  are  perma- 
nently closed,  if  the  car  has  any,  as  worse  than  useless. 

The  outside  platform  is  used  for  exit  only,  and  on  this  side  the  ends 
of  the  car  are  always  in  contact  with  the  platform,  whether  on 
straight  line  or  on  the  curve.  Doors  or  platform  gates  on  this  side 
are  placed  accordingly  at  the  ends  only,  from  which  exit  only  is 
permitted.* 

The  effect  is  not  only  to  make  the  horse-shoe  platform  as  useful  as 
the  straight  for  loading  and  unloading,  and  to  increase  the  seating 
capacity  of  the  same  car  floor  space  from  42  to  56  or  more,  but  also 
to  very  greatly  facilitate  rapid  loading  and  unloading. 

The  passenger  entering  through  the  middle  door,  knowing  that  he 
can  only  leave  through  the  end  doors,  goes  as  near  to  the  end  of 

*  A  minor  difficulty  will  be  seen  from  Fig.  5,  that  the  corner  of  the  car  is  not 
exactly  parallel  with  the  outside  platform  at  the  ends,  as  the  center  door  is  with  the 
inside  platform  ;  but  must  either  project  over  the  platform  or  leave  a  slight  tri- 
angular gap  to  be  stepped  over.  This  difficulty  is  overcome  by  the  simple  device 
shown  in  Fig.  6  ;  viz.,  chamfering  off  the  under  part  of  the  corner  of  the  car,  and 
adding  a  boiler-plate  extension  faced  with  rubber,  which  rides  over  the  platform. 


24 


This  train  is  just  starting,  and  in 
the  act  of  applying  grips,  and  hence 
s  seconds  ahead  of  the  position  it 
will  have  in  motion. 


This  train  is  just  entering  the 
ration  and  hence,  throughout  the 
i  sec.  needed  for  so  doing,  is  about 


To  illustrate  that  length  of  train  has  little  real  connection 
with  ease  of  loading,  the  station  is  supposed  to  be  divided  by 
impassible  partitions  (except  to  let  the  cars  through)  into  3 
equal  stations  holding  6  cars  each,  I,  2  and  3. 

The  arrows  represent  the  approximate  position  of  the  various 
separate  station  entrances  proposed,  each  at  least  equal  in 
width  to  the  single  entrance  through  which  all  passengers  now 
pass,  a  passageway  about  8  ft.  wide. 

Fully  two-thirds  of  Brooklyn  residents  live  east  of  Broad- 
way. Station  2,  with  7  times  the  present  entrance  space,  takes 
passengers  from  the  west  ;  stations  I  and  3,  each  with  9  or  10 
entrances,  take  passengeis  from  the  east.  This  traffic  being 
all  delivered  into  the  common  central  space  equalizes  itself 
between  I  and  3.  With  an  impassible  partition  between  I  and 
3,  the  promenade  sub-entrance  only  would  about  suffice  as  an 
equalizer. 

For  stopping  ami  starting,  length  of  train  makes  no  sensible 
difference,  since  the  grip  power  is  per  car,  and  there  are  always 
six  trains  in  motion  for  one  starting. 

The  center  of  the  Rotunda  of  the  Brooklyn  Terminus  stands 
exactly  on  the  present  center-line  of  Washington  Street,  which 
is  diverted  to  pass  around  the  circular  end  of  the  building. 

The  present  curve  in  the  bridge  at  the  Sands  Street  terminus 
is  taken  out.  The  new  terminus  includes  the  whole  of  the 
area  now  occupied,  however. 


Fig.  7. 


DIAGRAM 

showing  the 

Position  of  Trains  on  the  Bridge  and  the  Relative  Proportion  of 
Occupied  and  Unoccupied  Track, 

When  Running  7  Trains  of  18  Cars  Each  at  2  minute  20  second  intervals, 

OR    126   CARS  IN   ALL  IN  SERVICE. 


In  the  off  hours  the  same  number  of  trains  is  continued  in  service,  simply  diminishing  the  length 
of  each,  first  to  8  or  9  and  then  to  4  or  5  cars. 


7 otal  Length  center  to 


of  Rotundas,  .       6,000  ft. 

"  track  on  horse-shoes,  6,180  " 
"  face  to  face  of  station,        .       .       .    5,360  " 

of  track  circuit  (5,360 -]- 900)  X  2  =  12,520" 
Fraction  of  do.  occupied  by  cats,  900  X  7  =  6,300  " 
'Time  required  for  round  trip  at  880  ft. 

per  min,  no  stop,  14  min.  14  sec,  or  854  sec. 

Two  stops,  100  " 

Stopping  and  starting,  5X4  sees.,  .       20  " 

Total,      .  974  sec. 

Interval  between  trains,  7  in  service,  139 -|- sees.,  01  2,053  ft 
An  odd  number  of  trains  being  desirable,  so  that  two  trains 
may  not  be  starting  at  once  from  the  opposite  terminus,  7  is  the 
proper  number  regardless  of  the  exact  number  of  cais  in  train. 
Length  of  /S-car  train,  .  .  900  ft.,  61  sees,  in  time. 
Interval  between  them  in  motion,  1,153  "  79  " 
Minimum  do.  at  one  point  only,     .     352  "   24  " 

Should  a  longer  stop  be  desired,  say  60  seconds,  or  20  per 
cent,  more  time,  we  have  : 
Total  time  of  trip,  974 -j- 20,  994  sees. 
Time  interval  center  to  center 

of  trains,  .       .  142 

Time  interval  in  the  clear,  81 
Minimum  at  entering  station,  16 


(instead  of  139  or  140. 
(instead  of  79.) 
(instead  of  24.) 


2? 


the  car  as  possible,  thus  leaving  the  way  clear  behind  him  for  others. 
As  a  loaded  train  enters  the  station  the  passengers  naturally  gather 
around  the  end  exit  doors,  leaving  a  clear  open  space  for  incoming 
passengers  to  enter.  When  the  doors  are  simultaneously  thrown  open, 
the  stream  of  incoming  passengers,  so  far  from  impeding  the  exit, 
serves  as  a  substitute  for  the  brakeman  to  quickly  drive  out  the 
laggards. 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  cars  arranged  in  this  way  will  both  load 
and  unload  more  quickly  than  either  process  can  be  done  separately, 
for  the  reason  that  the  passengers  are  in  no  case  in  each  other's  way, 
but  keep  always  moving  ahead  out  of  the  way  of  those  behind.  In 
other  words,  no  passenger  ever  has  occasion  to  go  back  upon  his 
tracks  within  the  car  to  get  out  again,  and  so  interfere  with  others. 

In  trains  of  this  length  there  will  be  a  natural  tendency  among 
the  passengers  to  select  a  location  in  accordance  with  their  destina- 
tion. Those  going  to  Broadway  or  west  of  it  will  take  the  middle 
cars.  Those  going  back  towards  the  East  River  will  take  the  end 
cars,  and  so  on.  Thus  there  will  be  a  constant  tendency  to  utilize 
all  parts  of  the  ample  platform  space.  A  difficulty  which  may  have 
to  be  guarded  against,  however,  will  be  a  tendency  of  the  south 
arm  of  the  horse-shoe  station  to  receive  more  passengers  than  the 
north.  A  means  of  avoiding  this  which  would  be  exceedingly  popular 
will  be  to  make  the  rear  four  or  five  cars  of  every  train  smoking 
cars,  and  permit  smoking  on  the  north  platforms. 

With  such  ample  station  arrangements  as  proposed  this  is  feasible. 
With  the  present  arrangements  it  is  not  feasible,  and  many  passengers 
are  lost  to  the  bridge  and  gained  by  the  ferries  because  of  the  fact 
that  they  can  smoke  on  the  one  and  not  on  the  other. 

End  doors  to  connect  the  cars  may  be  used  or  not.  It  is  doubtful 
if  they  serve  as  useful  a  purpose  as  would  the  four  seats  per  car 
which  they  destroy.  The  end  doors  are  little  used  on  the  elevated 
trains,  and  that  little  is  mostly  from  mere  restlessness.  With  these 
still  shorter  trips  the  seating  space  will  be  worth  more. 

Fourteen-car  trains  will  be  10  cars,  or  33  seconds,  longer  than  the 
4-car  trains  which  it  is  now  proposed  to  run  at  90  second  intervals. 
Allowing  only  3  seconds  to  be  saved  by  the  superior  method  of 
loading  and  unloading,  they  can  be  run  at  two-minute  intervals  with 
the  same  safety  distance  between  trains  as  now,  giving  a  car  capacity 
of  30 X  14=420  cars  per  hour,  and  seating  capacity  of  420X56  = 
23,520  passengers  per  hour.  By  running  18-car  trains  (see  Fig.  7) 
at  2  minute  20  second  intervals,  a  capacity  of  468  cars  or  26,208 
seated  passengers  per  hour  will  be  obtained,  but  this  may  be  taken 
as  the  utmost  possible  over  a  single  road-bed  and  track.  The  total 
seating  and  standing  capacity  of  the  present  3-car  trains,  with  100 


26 


passengers  crowded  into  cars  seating  only  42,  is  12,000  per  hour, 
which  will  be  increased  by  the  approaching  addition  of  another  car 
to  16,000  per  hour,  and  it  is  probably  doubted  by  no  one  that  these 
4-car  trains  will  be  at  once  crowded  as  full  as  the  3-car  trains  now 
are. 

These  figures  place  it  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt,  without 
entering  into  any  niceties  of  calculation  as  to  the  exact  probabilities, 
that  the  available  seating  capacity  of  the  long  trains  here  proposed 
will  be  almost  immediately  used  up  in  regular  every-day  service, 
without  considering  the  traffic  of  extra  heavy  days.  The  only 
remaining  possibility  for  meeting  the  inevitable  future  growth  of 
traffic,  will  then  be  to  begin  anew  the  process  of  overcrowding  the 
cars,  which  should  never  be  permitted  while  other  possibilities 
remain.  For  expenses  will  increase  in  far  less  than  direct  proportion 
to  the  number  of  cars.  Up  to  the  limit  of  the  total  car-moving 
capacity  herein  provided  for,  careful  computations,  which  the  writer 
will  be  pleased  to  give  in  detail,  and  which  allow  fully  for  all  direct 
and  indirect  expenses,  indicate  that  the  extra  cost  of  seating  every 
passenger,  even  in  the  rush  hours,  instead  of  packing  them  in  like 
cattle,  will  not  (at  least,  need  not)  exceed  one-fourth  cent  per 
additional  seated  passenger  who  would  otherwise  ride  standing, 
leaving  the  cost  per  passenger  now  seated  unchanged. 

As  a  mere  money-making  investment  to  increase  the  traffic  of  the 
bridge,  this  slight  increase  of  expense  would  be  advisable,  apart  from 
the  equitable  claim  of  every  passenger  to  a  seat  when  it  can  be  had 
at  so  slight  a  cost.  Nothing  could  be  a  more  attractive  novelty,  or 
tend  more  powerfully  to  attract  residents  to  Brooklyn  by  contrast, 
than  to  be  able  to  secure  seats  even  in  the  crowded  hours.  And  it 
maybe  added  that  nothing  could  conduce  more  to  the  public  interest 
than  for  the  cities  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  to  demonstrate  on  the 
only  line  under  their  control  that  the  shameful  overcrowding  which 
prevails  on  public  conveyances  comes  chiefly  from  private  greed, 
and  is  not  a  necessity  of  their  profitable  operation.  In  suburban 
train  service,  where  the  expenses  are  far  greater  in  proportion  to 
fare  paid,  such  overcrowding  is  never  thought  of.  But  at  present 
it  comes  with  an  ill  grace  for  the  public  to  complain,  since  the  only 
line  over  which  they  have  absolute  control  is  the  worst  offender  of  all. 

The  question,  therefore,  is  even  now  an  urgent  one,  whether  it  is 
possible  to  still  further  increase  the  capacity  of  the  bridge  beyond 
14  or  18-car  trains  over  a  single  track.  It  appears  probable  that  it 
can  be  doubled  again,  by  adding  a  second  story  or  deck  cable  track 
above  the  present  one  and  entirely  independent  of  it.  If  so,  the 
obviously  proper  use  for  that  track  is  for  running  cars  from  the 
various  Brooklyn  elevated  lines  direct  to  the  New  York  terminus 


a; 


without  trans-shipment,  leaving  the  lower  (present)  track  to  accom- 
modate the  horse-car  passengers  and  such  others  as  come  to  it.  With 
any  other  form  of  terminal  station  than  that  herein  proposed  this 
would  be  practically  impossible,  for  lack  of  terminal  room  at  New 
York.  Under  the  circulating  system,  with  such  cars  and  stations  as 
proposed,  it  is  unquestionably  entirely  practicable,  and  at  very 
moderate  cost. 

This  upper  track  is  the  more  likely  to  be  early  demanded  because 
it  will  provide  not  simply  more  facilities,  but  a  different  a?id  better 
kind  of  facilities,  than  any  heretofore  in  use  or,  so  far  as  the  writer 
knows,  suggested.  If  constructed,  it  would  give  a  total  capacity  of 
about  900  cars  per  hour,  or  just  7^  times  the  present  capacity,  with 
3  car  trains.  The  means  of  access  from  the  street  to  the  station,  as 
below  sketched,  will  be  from  fifteen  to  twenty  times  as  great  as  now, 
at  least  ;  the  interior  means  of  access  to  the  cars  will  likewise  be 
ample  ;  the  architectural  effect  of  the  station  will  be  decidedly  im- 
proved by  the  additional  height  required.  There  remains  therefore 
only  the  question  of  adapting  the  bridge  to  such  an  upper  track. 

A   SECOND  STORY  CABLE  TRACK. 

The  question  of  the  capacity  of  the  bridge  to  carry  one  or  more 
additional  pairs  of  cable  car  tracks  is  one  of  too  purely  technical  a 
nature  to  be  advantageously  entered  into  in  this  report.  Suffice  it 
to  say  that  the  writer  has  given  the  matter  some  study,  and  has  taken 
the  opinion  of  one  of  the  most  competent  and  expert  bridge 
engineers  in  the  country  for  this  class  of  structures,  who  is  familiar 
with  the  construction  of  the  Brooklyn  bridge.  He  therefore  deems 
it  an  entirely  safe  statement  that  from  $150,000  to  $500,000  will 
suffice  to  make  all  necessary  changes  in  the  suspended  super- 
structure to  add  a  second  track  above  the  present  one,  and  that  for 
less  than  $1,000,000  two  extra  complete  track  circuits  can  be  added 
to  the  bridge,  one  over  the  present  cable  tracks  and  one  over  the 
outer  roadways. 

This  is  on  the  assumption  that  only  minor  reconstructions  of  the 
floor  system,  stiffening  trusses  and  tower  stays  will  be  required  to 
provide  amply  for  the  trifling  percentage  of  increased  load  on  the 
cables,  as  is  believed  to  be  the  case  ;  but  even  if  more  considerable 
modifications  are  required,  the  total  cost  of  the  suspended  super- 
structure, cables  and  all,  was  under  $3,500,000  (out  of  about  $14,- 
500,000),  and  it  could  probably  be  renewed  complete  to-day  for 
considerably  less  than  that  sum.  Fortunately  the  type  of  structure 
is  such  as  to  permit  of  such  strengthening  without  entire  reconstruc- 
tion more  readily  than  most  others. 


28 


These  figures  will  show  that  the  cost  of  gaining  the  additional 
capacity  can  in  no  case  be  a  serious  matter  compared  with  the  bene- 
fit derived. 

In  case  both  of  these  upper  circuits  were  added,  the  outer  one 
would  rise  above  the  inner  one  at  the  termini,  and  enter  the  buildings 
on  an  additional  upper  floor.  The  entire  practicability  of  taking  the 
crowd  of  passengers  to  and  from  such  upper  floors,  by  powerful  and 
capacious  lifts,  has  already  been  demonstrated  at  Liverpool  and 
elsewhere,  and  will  not  be  questioned. 

The  upper  track  or  tracks  can  be  readily  operated  as  follows : 

A  separate  grip  car,  provided  with  powerful  grips,  should  be  used 
in  lieu  of  a  locomotive.  It  is  a  mere  question  of  proportion  to  get 
any  desired  gripping  power. 

Successive  trains  as  they  arrive  from  any  quarter  of  Brooklyn 
should  be  coupled  on  to  this  car,  locomotive  and  all.  The  locomo- 
tives may  use  a  little  steam  going  up  grade  on  the  bridge,  but  other- 
wise pass  over  simply  as  vehicles,  to  save  the  trouble  and  delay  of 
cutting  them  off. 

Promptly  on  time,  whatever  the  number  of  cars,  the  cable  train 
should  leave,  discharging  its  passengers  at  New  York,  taking  a  fresh 
load  and  returning  to  the  Brooklyn  terminus,  where  the  grip  car 
should  drop  by  gravity  around  the  horse-shoe  to  its  position  for  the 
return  trip,  and  the  train  behind  it  be  cut  up  into  its  original  consti- 
tuent units  for  the  several  lines.* 

It  is  not  recommended  that  both  these  upper  circuits,  nor  possibly 
either  of  them,  should  be  immediately  constructed,  but  before  the 
end  of  the  present  century  both  of  them  are  likely  to  be  needed, 
and  hence  the  ultimate  construction  of  both  should  be  provided  for 
in  all  present  plans  ;  and  it  is  believed  that  one  complete  circuit  for 
the  direct  service  should  be  added  at  once,  for  the  following 
reasons : 

Within  the  belt  which  is  more  than  two  miles  and  less  than  eight 
miles  from  the  New  York  City  Hall,  there  is  about  7^  times  as 
great  an  available  residence  area  in  Brooklyn  as  on  Manhattan 
Island,  as  shown  on  the  accompanying  map,  measuring  the  Brooklyn 
distances  via  the  bridge  and  Brooklyn  City  Hall,  and  not  in  an  air 
line.  Balancing  the  New  York  horse-car  travel  into  the  business 
section  against  the  Brooklyn  ferry-travel,  and  neglecting  both  (both 
having  about  the  same  volume,  and  coming  chiefly  from  a  narrow 
belt  near  to  the  business  section),  there  are  150,000,000  passengers 
coming  from  upper  New  York  to  doivn-town  New  York  (below  14th 

*  It  may  be  arranged  in  a  very  simple  way  to  run  the  cars  only  over  the  bridge, 
the  locomotives  dropping  and  resuming  their  trains  on  the  Brooklyn  side,  but  the 
above  method  seems  the  better  one. 


29 


Street),  via  the  elevated  lines,  against  only  30,000,000  from  Brooklyn 
via  the  bridge.  Were  the  Brooklyn  areas  at  equal  distances  sending 
as  much  travel  to  down-town  New  York  as  the  Manhattan  Island 
areas,  there  would  be  150,000,000X7^  =  1,087,500,000  passengers 
per  annum  over  the  bridge  instead  of  30,000,000,  or  36  times  as  much 
as  now.  While  this  enormous  aggregate  can  never  be  expected,  the 
computation  does  indicate  the  fearful  disadvantage  under  which 
Brooklyn  labors  from  the  lack  of  foresight  of  its  citizens  and  prop- 
erty holders  in  not  having,  long  ere  this,  exhausted  the  resources  of 
engineering  to  place  it  strictly  on  a  par  with  up-town  New  York  in 
transit  facilities,  as  by  this  plan  at  least  it  is  readily  in  their  power 
to  do  at  trifling  cost  ;  the  passenger  being  carried  without  change 
from  any  point  in  Brooklyn  to  the  New  York  City  Hall,  as  from  any 
point  in  New  York. 

The  advantage  and  stimulus  which  such  direct  transit  would  give 
to  Brooklyn  as  a  residence  city  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  It  is  not 
too  much  to  say  that  it  would  entirely  change  the  character  of  many 
parts  of  it  in  that  respect.  In  the  judgment  of  various  experienced 
real-estate  men  whom  the  writer  has  consulted,  it  would  at  once  add 
from  10  to  25  per  cent,  to  the  renting  value  of  Brooklyn  residences, 
according  to  their  distance  from  the  City  Hall  ;  and  fully 
$100,000,000  to  the  present  assessed  valuation  of  $383,000,000 
within  a  very  short  time  after  the  whole  improvement  had  been 
carried  out  in  thoroughly  good  shape. 

The  advantage  must  not  be  gauged  by  what  can  be  figured  out 
as  the  bare  saving  to  the  passengers  of  time  and  muscular  exertion, 
or  even  the  possible  loss  of  a  seat.  Experience  has  clearly  shown 
that  the  disadvantage  of  changing  conveyances  en  route  is  much 
greater  than  can  be  accounted  for  in  this  way.  The  fact  seems  to  be 
that  in  every  family  there  are  young,  infirm  or  timid  members  who 
have  a  dread  of  such  changes,  and  the  movements  of  the  whole 
family  are  governed  by  those  who  perhaps  do  an  insignificant  fraction 
of  its  traveling.  At  any  rate,  even  a  single  change  between  cars  on 
parallel  tracks  on  long  railway  trips  is  found  to  have  a  serious  effect 
on  patronage.  In  rapid  transit  trips  it  is  proportionately  a  vastly 
greater  objection,  and  has  likewise  a  vastly  more  serious  effect,  since 
it  decides  the  choice  of  a  residence  instead  of  a  route  for  a  single  trip. 

To  the  poor  of  New  York  such  facilities  would  be  of  especial 
value,  since  it  would  give  them  direct  and  quick  access  to  the  cheap 
lands  and  homes  of  surburban  Brooklyn,  which  are  now  beyond  their 
reach  because  of  the  time  and  cost  of  getting  to  them. 

Direct  pecuniary  advantages  to  the  revenue  of  the  bridge  would 
also  result  from  the  immediate  construction  of  the  upper  track,  as 
follows  : 


30 


First.  It  would  save  the  cost  of  operating  the  lower  (present) 
tracks  during  the  unprofitable  night  hours.  The  Brooklyn  Elevated 
trains  must  run  at  night  anyway,  and  they  could  be  run  over  the 
bridge  by  their  own  motors  during  the  night,  with  greater  profit  to 
them  as  well  as  to  the  bridge.  At  least  $20,000  per  year  should  thus 
be  saved. 

Secondly.  An  enormous  summer  business  by  direct  trains  from 
the  New  York  terminus  to  Coney  Island  and  other  Long  Island  re- 
sorts can  be  done  without  any  extra  car  service  or  expense,  leaving 
the  revenue  from  it  clear  gain,  since  it  is  in  the  reverse  direction 
from  the  rush  of  business  travel,  viz.,  from  New  York  in  the  morn- 
ing, and  back  to  it  at  night.  After  the  opening  of  the  Brooklyn 
Elevated  lines  now  building,  there  will  be  four  different  routes  by 
which  such  transit  will  be  possible,  and  more  will  be  added.  This 
traffic  should  fully  double  the  bridge's  net  earnings  during  the  sum- 
mer months,  or  be  worth  to  it  from  $250,000  to  $400,000  per  year. 

Thirdly.  The  direct  transit,  in  connection  with  a  new  Elm  Street 
and  Fourth  Avenue  line,  would  greatly  stimulate  the  shopping,  calling, 
theatre  and  other  transient  travel  between  New  York  and  Brooklyn, 
which  is  also  highly  profitable,  since  it  is  mostly  off-hour  traffic.  As 
will  be  seen  below,  and  in  Fig.  2,  it  is  proposed  to  provide  both  the 
Manhattan  Elevated  and  the  new  underground  Elm  Street  line  with 
termini  within  the  building.  The  indirect  value  to  Brooklyn  of  pro- 
viding well  for  this  traffic  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the  mere  bridge 
fares  collected.  As  upper  New  York  will  always  be  the  chief  shopping, 
social  and  theatre  centre  of  the  metropolis,  Brooklyn's  future  as  a 
residence  city  depends  on  making  a  trip  to  it  a  pleasure  and  not  a 
burden,  even  more  than  on  quick  business  transit. 

Supposing  eight  Brooklyn  rapid  transit  lines  to  be  delivering 
4-car  trains  at  3-minute  intervals  there  will  be  8X4X20=640  cars 
per  hour  to  take  care  of.  A  single  track  circuit  will  permit  of 
about  14-car  trains  at  2-minute  intervals  or  420  cars  per  hour,  or 
would  give  direct  transit  to  about  five  lines  only,  which  are  now 
building.  When,  and  if,  this  capacity  proves  too  small  (it  is  equiva- 
lent to  about  150,000,000  passengers  per  annum,  or  about  that  now 
entering  lower  New  York,  via  the  four  Manhattan  Elevated  lines) 
the  second  outer  circuit  must  be  added,  but  one  will  certainly  suffice 
for  many  years. 

THE  BROOKLYN  TERMINUS. 

Under  the  system  of  operation  here  outlined  there  is  but  one 
rational  and  defensible  location  for  the  Brooklyn  terminus,  viz  : 
precisely  where  it  is,  but  on  the  axis  of  the  bridge  prolonged  (see 


31 


Fig.  7),  the  center  of  the  rotunda  being  exactly  on  the  center  line  of 
Washington  Street,  a  little  below  Sands  Street. 

Architectural  dignity  and  propriety  indicate  this  to  be  the  proper 
course,  as  well  as  more  urgent  reasons,  the  twist  in  the  bridge 
approach  at  the  Brooklyn  end  being  an  unsightly  feature. 

This  requires  the  acquisition  of  most  or  all  of  the  small  and  cheap 
block  between  Washington  and  Adams  Streets,  opposite  the  present 
building.  The  two  locations  for  a  terminus  at  the  City  Hall  or  at 
Concord  Street,  over  which  there  has  been  so  much  dispute,  become 
alike  inadmissible  under  the  plans  here  outlined,  but  the  land  now 
owned  in  that  direction  will  all  be  useful  and  necessary  for  storing 
the  rush-hour  cars  during  the  off  hours. 

The  necessity  for  retaining  the  station  where  it  is  results  from  the 
configuration  of  the  streets  at  that  point,  and  from  their  relation  to 
the  bridge  axis.  It  is  proposed  to  leave  Washington  Street  entirely 
unobstructed  as  a  foot,  team  and  horse-car  approach  to  the  bridge, 
and  to  provide  for  four  Elevated  lines  each  in  Fulton  Street  and 
Adams  Street,  as  follows  : 

In  each  street  there  should  be  placed  two  tiers  of  two  tracks 
each  ;  the  upper  tracks  both  up-tracks  and  the  lower  tracks  both 
down-tracks,  each  track  accommodating  the  trains  of  two  lines. 

Each  line  in  succession  branches  off  from  the  trunk  with  its  up-  and 
down-track  still  in  the  same  position,  t.  e.,  one  above  the  other,  the 
two  being  brought  into  their  normal  position,  side  by  side,  as  soon 
as  possible  thereafter,  which  may  be  within  a  block  or  two  of  the 
point  of  separation.  All  four  lines  of  each  main  stem  will  probably 
have  separated  from  each  other  not  far  beyond  the  City  Hall. 

The  details  of  the  arrangements  thus  briefly  outlined  work  out  very 
favorably  at  the  bridge  terminus  and  elsewhere.  The  consent  of 
the  lines  which  have  now  preempted  Fulton  and  Adams  Streets  for 
their  sole  use  can  be  enforced  (if  not  freely  given)  by  making  it  a 
condition  of  their  running  trains  over  the  bridge. 

The  arrangement  thus  rudely  outlined  seems  to  be,  and  is,  a  peculiar 
one,  but  it  is  the  only  possible  one  to  accomplish  the  end,  and  it  is  to 
be  regretted  that  the  people  of  Brooklyn  do  not  more  clearly  perceive 
that  their  whole  rapid  transit  problem  is  a  peculiar  one,  compared 
with  which  that  of  New  York  is  simplicity  itself ;  and  that  by  failing 
to  act  accordingly,  they  are  greatly  imperilling  the  symmetrical  and 
healthy  growth  of  their  city. 

The  special  difficulties  are,  first,  that  the  rapid  transit  lines  must 
radiate  in  fan-like  fashion  from  a  single  point,  for  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  engineering,  and  secondly,  that  from  this  point  the 
traffic  must  be  carried  for  over  a  mile  over  a  single  way  of  com- 
munication to  an  exterior  point.     There  is  no  other  city  in  the 


32 


world  where  a  similar  problem  has  or  can  arise  on  any  considerable 
scale. 

The  special  difficulties  all  lie  within  a  mile  or  so  of  the  bridge 
terminus,  but  there  they  are  very  great,  and  they  will  be  fatal  to  the 
healthy  growth  of  Brooklyn  unless  plans  are  worked  out  as  a  whole 
with  corresponding  care,  and  with  careful  provision  for  the  future 
as  well  as  the  present.  By  building  another  bridge,  say  at  Grand 
Street,  the  difficulty  may  be  in  a  sense  diminished,  by  splitting  it  in 
half,  but  as  the  nature  of  each  half  remains  the  same,  the  necessary 
treatment  of  each  half  likewise  remains  the  same. 

The  preceding  suggestions,  appear  to  exhaust  the  possibilities  of 
the  bridge  as  respects  car-carrying  capacity.  When  they  are  exhaust- 
ed, which  will  not  be  till  some  400,000,000  passengers  per  annum 
are  passing  over  the  bridge,  or  some  250,000,000  if  seating  capacity 
only  is  counted  ;  the  only  resource  will  be  to  build  another  bridge. 

It  remains  only  to  consider  the  two  phases  of  the  problem  which 
have  been  heretofore  postponed.  Access  from  the  street  to  the  station 
and  improvement  in  the  architectural  appearance  and  surroundings 
of  the  terminus. 

ACCESS  FROM   THE  STREETS  TO  THE  STATION. 

This  is  really  the  weakest  point  of  the  present  arrangements.  It 
is  proposed  to  increase  the  present  facilities  fully  twenty-fold,  by 
simple  and  inexpensive  measures  outlined  below,  so  that  a  traffic  ten 
times  as  great  as  now,  as  in  time  it  may  be,  can  be  carried  without 
half  the  jam  in  the  street  approaches.  Three  of  the  measures  to 
this  end  are  in  a  sense  for  architectural  effect,  also  since  they  are  de- 
manded for  that  end  alone  they  may  therefore  be  considered  first. 

MANHATTAN  ELEVATED  STATION. 

The  lower  (present)  bridge  tracks  being  reconstructed  on  a 
decided  down  grade  toward  Chatham  Street,  so  as  to  be  only  some  10 
or  12  ft.  above  the  street,  by  running  in  the  upper  bridge  tracks 
(for  the  direct  Brooklyn  elevated  service)  level,  or  on  a  slight  up 
grade  a  mezzanine  floor  may  be  introduced  at  the  Chatham 
Street  end  of  the  station  on  which  a  horse-shoe  circuit  terminal 
for  the  Manhattan  elevated  line  may  be  introduced,  giving  that  line 
corresponding  advantages  to  what  the  bridge  service  gains  from  the 
new  terminal,  and  dispensing  with  the  present  utterly  inadequate  and 
unsightly  Chatham  Street  terminal,  while  affording  the  best  possible 
connection  between  the  New  York  and  Brooklyn  lines. 

BRIDGE   ACROSS  PARK  ROW. 

If  the  present  unsightly  Chatham  Street  station  were  removed 
from  the  immediate  front  of  the  bridge  terminus,  it  would  be  much 
more  apparent  than  now,  that  the  present  bridge  across  Park  Row 


33 


is  quite  unfitted  architecturally,  as  well  as  otherwise,  to  remain  in 
front  of  a  terminal  in  which  some  respect  was  paid  to  appearances, 
especially  as  it  butts  against  the  dilapidated  Registry  building,  which 
occupies,  for  the  mere  sake  of  saving  rent,  ground  which  should  be 
given  up  to  grass. 

By  removing  this  building  (as  Mayor  Hewitt  has  proposed)  and 
the  present  bridge,  and  erecting  a  light  and  graceful  arch  of  the 
form  outlined  in  Fig.  3,  an  open  park  front  will  be  given  to 
the  station,  and  direct  access  to  it  obtained  from  Broadway, 
without  going  up  or  down  a  single  step.  This  change  alone  will 
put  a  very  different  aspect  on  residences  in  Brooklyn  for  those 
doing  business  on  the  west  side  of  Broadway,  and  add  greatly  to  the 
attractiveness  of  City  Hall  Park,  especially  for  this  reason  : 

The  present  Registry  building  (which  has  been  altered  out  of  all 
resemblance  of  its  former  self)  was  a  revolutionary  prison,  and  in  it 
Nathan  Hale  was  confined  on  the  night  before  his  execution, 
which  took  place  nearly  under  the  bridge  at  Franklin  Square.  What 
more  appropriate  place  than  the  site  of  this  building,  at  the  end  of 
the  bridge,  could  there  be  for  erecting  the  statue  to  his  memory,  a 
suitable  site  for  which  is  now  in  question  ?  It  would  be  about  mid- 
way between  the  bridge  terminus  and  City  Hall  Park,  and  the  statue, 
bridge  and  the  two  buildings  would  then  help  out  each  other,  while  a 
suitable  inscription  would  keep  in  memory  not  only  the  man  him- 
self, but  the  spot  on  which  he  suffered  imprisonment  and  death. 

The  archway  should  be  at  least  40  feet  wide,  and  better  50  feet, 
and  should  span  sidewalks  and  all.  All  steps  being  eliminated  it 
will  accommodate  easily  four  to  six  times  as  many  as  now  use  the 
bridge.  It  connects  on  a  level  with  the  exit  platforms,  and  also 
with  a  ramp  which  passes  down  so  as  to  barely  pass  under  the  track, 
giving  a  headway  for  the  distance  between  the  rails  of  about  7  feet. 
The  passage-way  then  rises  by  a  ramp  (or  a  few  steps  might  be  pre- 
ferable) into  the  central  rotunda.  Only  for  the  five  feet  under  the 
rails  would  the  headway  be  contracted. 


ARCHES  OVER   ENTRANCE   TO   BRIDGE  ROADWAYS. 

For  the  mere  sake  of  architectural  propriety  the  roadways  of  so 
grand  a  structure  should  terminate  in  some  feature  like  an  entrance 
arch  carrying  a  handsome  iron  gate,  like  that  of  the  Mills  Building, 
instead  of  rough  wooden  gates.  Such  arches  would  also  serve  a 
practical  purpose  in  connection  with  a  side  stairway  of  stone  to  give 
access  to  the  station  without  crossing  the  roadways,  under  either  of 
the  plans  outlined  in  Figs.  1  or  2,  and  are  provided  for  in  each. 


34 


STREET   CAR  CIRCLE. 

So  much  headway  as  now  exists  beneath  the  cable-car  tracks,  now 
used  for  the  promenade  and  waiting  and  ticket  rooms,  will  be  no 
longer  needed.  The  tracks  may  therefore  be  dropped  somewhat  and 
still  leave  a  great  deal  of  space  below,  which  may  be  utilized  in  a 
highly  advantageous  way  to  make  a  circular  terminus  for  street  car 
tracks  beneath  the  rotunda  and  connecting  therewith.  The  Broad- 
way, Chambers  Street,  3d  and  4th  Avenue,  Elm  Street  lines  and 
others,  could  use  this  terminus  for  a  certain  number  of  their  cars, 
thus  enabling  Brooklyn  passengers  to  enter  and  leave  New  York 
horse-cars  under  cover  in  the  same  building,  while  relieving  lower 
Park  Row.  There  will  also  be  sufficient  space  for  a  cab-stand  as 
well,  under  cover. 

ENTRANCES    FROM    NORTH   WILLIAM,   WILLIAM   AND    ROSE  STREETS. 

These  streets  have  heretofore  added  nothing  to  the  approach 
facilities,  for  the  good  reason  that  there  was  no  possible  chance  above 
to  give  the  necessary  floor  space  to  permit  of  stairway  or  elevator 
connections  with  them.  The  new  terminus  will  permit  all  three 
streets  to  be  utilized  in  this  way  on  an  extensive  scale,  and  it  is 
expected  that  a  large  part  of  the  total  traffic  will  enter  through  them. 
As  will  be  seen  in  Fig.  2,  the  entire  length  of  all  four  sides  of  the 
building  is  utilized  for  entrances. 

A  glance  at  the  map  will  show  how  greatly  these  new  entrances 
will  tend  to  increase  the  area  tributary  to  the  bridge  at  the  expense 
of  the  ferries  and  up-town  New  York,  while  affording  necessary  and 
great  relief  to  Nassau  Street  and  Park  Row.  This  will  be  still  more 
clearly  seen  if  we  remember  that  as  a  natural  effect  of  propinquity 
and  past  conditions  the  greatest  proportion  of  Brooklyn  residents 
doing  business  in  New  York  are  located  along  the  East  River,  the 
proportion  decreasing  westwardly,  so  that  west  of  Broadway  there  are 
comparatively  few.  Probably  a  large  majority  of  the  bridge  patrons 
are  now  compelled  to  go  west  first,  to  the  very  west  end  of  the 
structure,  before  they  can  go  east,  so  that  they  have  to  go  out  of 
their  way  to  get  into  a  crowd. 

The  same  fact  also  suggests  that  a  still  greater  and  more  gener- 
ally useful  increase  in  means  of  access  to  the  bridge  can  be  ob- 
tained through  the  promenade,  as  follows  : 

THE  PROMENADE. 

Simultaneously  with  the  construction  of  an  upper  track  it  is 
proposed  to  prolong  the  grade  of  the  high  part  of  the  promenade 
(beyond  the  anchorage)  backward  without  a  break  to  the  rotunda, 


35 


which  it  will  just  strike,  taking  out  the  present  promenade  stairway 
at  the  anchorage  and  giving  an  upper  promenade  parallel  with  the 
present  one  and  about  ten  feet  above  it. 

This  change  not  only  eliminates  the  stairway,  which  is  an  objec- 
tionable and  even  dangerous  feature,  and  caused  the  only  serious 
accident  in  the  history  of  the  bridge,  but  leaves  a  vacant  section  of 
the  old  promenade  underneath  the  new  one  which  will  be  well 
adapted  for  running  elevators  up  into  it  from  the  streets  below;  at 
first  only  from  Franklin  Square  and  near  the  river  front,  but  add- 
ing to  them  as  traffic  warrants.  To  run  them  up  into  the  main 
promenade  would  be  so  unsightly  and  even  dangerous  as  to  be  prac- 
tically out  of  the  question,  but  narrow  stairways  may  give  access  to 
the  main  promenade  from  the  lower  one. 

This  will  afford  an  independent  approach  from  the  eastward  streets 
to  the  cable  cars,  preferably  collecting  the  car  fare  before  the  elevators 
are  entered,  and  then  connecting  the  lower  promenade  with  the  out- 
going platforms  direct,  without  further  ticket  wickets,  making  no  extra 
charge  for  using  the  elevators.  Those  ascending  the  elevators  merely 
to  reach  the  main  promenade  will  then. pay  a  cable-car  fare.  There 
will  thus  be  in  the  crowded  hours  two  opposite  streams  of  passengers 
on  the  two  promenades,  those  on  the  upper  one  walking  over  to 
Brooklyn  and  those  on  the  lower  one  walking  down  toward  the  New 
York  terminus  to  take  the  cable  cars. 

A  large  part  of  the  receipts  thus  gained  will  be  clear  gain,  so  that 
the  elevators  will  unquestionably  pay  for  the  cost  to  run  them 
directly,  while  the  indirect  gain  to  the  bridge  traffic  and  to  public 
convenience  will  probably  be  found  to  be  surprisingly  great,  especially 
if  one  or  more  similar  elevators  were  added  on  the  Brooklyn  side. 
For  example,  it  will  be  the  easiest  way  to  reach  Broadway  from  the 
East  river  front,  even  if  one  does  not  wish  to  cross  the  bridge  at  all. 

The  disadvantage  the  bridge  cars  and  promenade  are  under  now 
may  be  paralleled  by  comparing  the  traffic  a  street  car  line  would 
have  which  admitted  passengers  at  the  termini  only,  with  that  of  a 
line  which  admits  them  at  all  points.  It  is  not  possible  to  admit 
passengers  to  the  cable  cars  except  at  the  terminus,  but  it  is  possible 
by  this  plan  to  admit  them  to  a  shaded,  comfortable  promenade  by 
which  they  can  walk  down-hill  to  the  cars.* 

*A  stretch  beyond  the  anchorage  and  stairway,  toward  the  river,  where  this 
sub-promenade  might  be  desirable,  is  now  blocked  by  diagonal  tie-rods  under  the 
high  promenade.  By  substituting  stiffening  knees  or  angles  this  space  also  will 
become  available.  It  is  worthy  of  note,  also,  that  an  elevator  trestle  to  connect  the 
river  front  with  the  middle  point  of  the  anchorage  span  (between  the  anchorage  and 
tower)  will  serve  a  useful  purpose  in  stiffening  the  bridge  against  vibration  and 
undulation,  since  at  that  point  the  bending  moments  are  the  greatest  of  the  entire 
structure. 


36 


STREET   CARS  OVER  ROADWAYS. 

The  spaciousness  of  the  New  York  terminus  makes  possible  still 
one  more  improvement  in  transit  facilities,  viz:  to  utilize  the  vacant 
space  under  the  New  York  terminus  to  enable  horse  cars  from 
Brooklyn  as  well  as  from  New  York  to  turn  into  it  under  cover  and  re- 
turn, thus  bringing  New  York  and  Brooklyn  street  cars  into  direct 
connection  under  cover. 

Heretofore  the  lack  of  terminal  room  at  New  York,  if  nothing  else, 
has  made  it  impossible  to  allow  Brooklyn  street  cars  over  the  road- 
ways of  the  Bridge.  By  admitting  them  to  the  roadways,  two  street 
car  fares  will  enable  one  to  pass  from  any  point  on  Broadway  or 
the  Bowery  to  any  point  in  Brooklyn,  by  practically  a  single  trip.  It 
appears  probable  also  that  the  elevators  to  the  promenade  just 
suggested  could  be  so  arranged  as  to  give  direct  access  from  them 
to  the  horse  cars,  without  the  slightest  injury  to  the  appearance  of 
the  structure,  which  is  the  only  obstacle.  The  opportunity  would  no 
doubt  be  eagerly  availed  of  by  the  street  car  lines  at  a  considerable 
toll,  as  the  longer  haul  would  be  balanced  by  doing  away  with  the 
long,  steep  grade  from  Fulton  Ferry. 

The  rail  should  be  a  flat  bar,  flush  with  the  planking,  having  a  groove 
in  it  just  wide  enough  to  admit  the  flange,  similar  to  the  "  Liverpool 
rail  "  used  throughout  England,  but  as  yet  almost  unknown  here, 
which  offers  no  obstacle  whatever  to  wheeled  vehicles. 

The  additional  traffic  thus  gained  would  be  largely  supplemental 
to  that  in  the  cable  cars,  and  not  drawn  therefrom,  but  rather  from 
the  promenade.  It  would  at  least  be  expedient  in  planning  the  new 
station  to  plan  it  so  as  to  afford  these  facilities  when  desired,  in  the 
best  manner,  without  further  modification.  The  date  when  the 
street  car  tracks  were  to  be  laid  could  then  be  left  in  abeyance. 


STREET  CARS  AT   BROOKLYN  TERMINUS. 

The  space  beneath  the  rotunda  of  the  Brooklyn  terminus  is  far 
more  imperatively  needed  than  that  at  New  York  as  a  terminus  for 
street  cars,  and  will  be  much  more  commodious  than  the  present 
open  space  at  Fulton  Ferry.  At  present  the  street  car  arrangements 
at  the  bridge  are  very  contracted  and  inadequate,  and ^or  this  reason, 
and  because  the  present  bridge  traffic  is  relatively  so  small,  rather 
than  from  the  preference  of  the  companies  (who  would  naturally 
prefer  to  save  the  steep  haul  from  the  ferries)  the  service  of  cars 
running  directly  to  the  bridge  is  scant  and  unreliable,  thus  driving 
many  passengers  from  the  bridge  to  the  ferries  in  order  to  obtain 
seats  in  horse  cars  on  the  Brooklyn  side. 


37 


In  view  of  the  great  importance  to  Brooklyn  of  making  the  transit 
to  New  York  a.s  attractive  and  comfortable  as  possible,  and  of  the 
present  crowding,  it  is  believed  that  all  the  facilities  herein  outlined, 
except  the  third  cable  track  circuit,  will  be  none  too  great  for 
advantageous  early  use,  and  will  be  cheap  indeed  at  their  probable 
cost,  which  is  rudely  estimated  at  $1,000,000  for  the  single  track 
complete,  chiefly  for  the  two  terminal  buildings  at  each  end  of  the 
bridge,  and  the  ground  they  stand  on,  and  between  $1,000,000  and 
$2,000,000  more  for  the  overhead  tracks  connecting  direct,  without 
change  of  cars,  with  all  the  elevated  lines.  There  will  also  be  not 
the  slightest  difficulty  in  executing  all  the  works  complete  without 
any  interruption  whatever  of  regular  traffic. 

Summarizing  the  ground  gone  over,  the  system  of  operation 
herein  suggested  is  believed  to  offer  the  following  advantages  as 
compared  with  any  others  which  have  been  or  (for  the  most  part) 
can  be  suggested  : 

SUMMARY   OF  ADVANTAGES: 

As  respects  Requirement  A  ;  Car  Carrying  Capacity  : 

1.  It  affords  the  maximum  capacity  for  the  present  cable  tracks 
about  three  times  what  is  reasonably  practicable  by  any  other  plan 
whatsoever. 

2.  It  affords  the  only  reasonable  possibility  of  enlarging  the 
capacity  by  one  or  two  additional  cable  circuits,  which  is  impossible 
without  effective  terminal  arrangements. 

3.  It  is  the  safest  possible  plan  ;  there  is  not  a  frog  or  switch  in 
the  track  in  regular  use,  tail  collisions  only  are  possible,  and  the 
speed  never  varies  from  10  miles  per  hour. 

4.  //  saves  all  expense  and  roo?n  for  switching  and  switching 
engines,  and  for  interlocking  apparatus,  which  alone  more  than  pays 
interest  on  the  whole  cost  of  the  improvement. 

5.  //  saves  a  large  sum  annually  in  train-zuages,  making  each 
trainman  five  or  six  times  as  efficient. 

6.  It  gives  longer  haul,  taking  passengers  more  nearly  to  their 
destination. 

7.  It  requires  four  full  trains  less  to  be  in  service  for  the  same 
capacity  than  would  be  required  by  a  switching  system,  or  7  in  place 
of  11.  With  18-car  trains,  at  $3,500  per  car,  this  represents  a  saving 
in  capital  investment  of  $252,000. 

8.  It  enables  every  passenger  to  be  provided  with  a  seat,  for  the 
present  at  least,  even  in  crowded  hours,  and  enables  the  crowd  on 
exceptional  days  to  be  readily  handled. 


g.  It  enables  smoking  to  be  permitted  in  rear  cars,  without  danger 
of  annoyance  to  non-smokers. 

10.  //  affords  the  only  possible  chance  for  a  direct  Brooklyn  elevated 
train  service  terminating  in  New  York,  which  will  alone  return  to 
Brooklyn  a  hundred-fold  the  cost  of  the  improvements. 

n.  It  will  especially  benefit  the  poor  of  New  York,  by  giving 
them  ready  access  to  the  cheap  homes  of  suburban  Brooklyn  ;  and 
makes  possible  a  lucrative  off-honr  traffic  to  Coney  Island  and  else- 
where which  will  be  nearly  clear  gain  to  the  bridge  revenues. 

As  respects  Requirement  B  ;    Interior  means  of  access  to  cars. 

12.  It  provides  a  broad,  spacious  rotunda,  with  ample  connected 
floor  spaces  to  the  east,  all  open  to  the  public  without  delay  at  ticket 
booths,  in  which  a  large  crowd  can  spread  itself  and  prepare  at  leisure 
to  enter  the  cars.    In  this  way  also  : 

13.  It  affords  direct  access  front  the  side  to  and  from  all  points 
of  the  train,  with  room  for  any  number  of  ticket  gates,  instead  of 
giving  access  at  the  end  of  a  long  platform  only. 

14.  It  promotes  quick  loading  and  unloading  of  cars,  and  enables 
both  processes  to  go  on  at  once,  by  a  more  rational  arrangement  of 
car  entrances. 

15.  It  provides  ample  space  for  waiting  and  parcels  rooms,  news 
stands,  toilet  rooms,  refreshment  and  cigar  stands,  and  similar  public 
conveniences,  now  lacking. 

As  respects  Requirement  C;  Means  of  access  from  the  city  streets 
to  the  station. 

16.  It  gives  direct  access  to  the  bridge  from  every  street  which  it 
crosses,  or  from  as  many  as  may  seem  desirable,  through  a  new  sub- 
promenade. 

17.  It  utilizes  the  three  streets  which  the  terminus  stands  over  as 
approaches,  and  so  relieves  Park  Row  and  Nassau  Street,  throwing 
most  of  the  travel  into  these  less  frequented  neighboring  streets  ; 
while  at  the  same  time  : 

18.  It  reduces  the  average  walk  to  the  station,  and  greatly  in- 
creases the  number  who  can  use  the  bridge  to  advantage. 

19.  It  gives  communication  by  a  direct  path  with  Broadway 
without  steps,  and  eliminates  all  stairways  at  the  Brooklyn  terminus. 

20.  It  gives  both  the  Manhattan  Elevated  Railway  and  the 
proposed  underground  Elm  Street  line  ample  terminals  within  the 
building  in  direct  connection  with  the  bridge  cars  and  trains  of  the 
Brooklyn  Elevated  Railways. 


39 


21.  It  provides  archways  over  the  bridge  roadway  entrances,  so 
that  the  station  can  be  entered  and  left  without  crossing  the  road- 
ways on  a  level. 

22.  It  eliminates  the  promenade  stairway,  which  caused  the  only 
serious  accident  on  the  bridge,  while  giving  through  the  promenade 
new  and  more  convenient  access  to  the  cars. 

23.  It  gives  with  the  New  York  and  Brooklyn  street  cars  needed 
and  commodious  terminal  stations  in  direct  connection  with  the 
bridge  cars. 

24.  It  gives  Brooklyn  street  cars  the  only  possible  chance  to  run 
over  the  bridge  roadways  and  connect  with  the  New  York  street 
cars  direct. 

As  respects  Requirement  D ;  Architectural  dignity  and  appro- 
priateness: 

25.  It  provides  stately  and  spacious  buildings,  worthy  of  the  bridge 
and  the  location,  which  will  do  honor  to  both  cities,  in  place  of  the 
present  unsightly  agglomerations,  which  are  a  reproach  and  disgrace 
to  both  cities,  and  create  a  reasonable  suspicion  that  they  are  with- 
out either  good  taste  or  good  sense. 

26.  It  improves  architecturally  the  present  Manhattan  Elevated 
station,  the  present  bridge  over  Chatham  Street,  and  the  entrance  to 
the  bridge  roadways  by  changes  which  are  useful  as  well  as  orna- 
mental. 

27.  In  these  and  other  ways  it  sets  an  example  of  good  service 
instead  of  bad  service  to  the  people  and  to  other  transit  companies, 
which  will  be  likely  to  bear  fruit  in  more  or  less  general  improve- 
ment in  the  lines  controlled  by  private  interests. 

28.  As  a  combined  effect  of  all  the  preceding,  it  should  enor- 
mously increase  the  bridge  revenue,  both  from  the  promenade, 
roadways  and  cable-cars,  and  tend  powerfully  to  promote  the  growth 
of  Brooklyn,  in  both  population  and  wealth,  by  eliminating  its 
greatest  disadvantage  as  a  residence  city. 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

A.  M.  WELLINGTON. 

Tribune  Building. 

New  York,  Dec.  8,  1887. 


Average  Number  of  Passengers  per  hour  of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge 
Cable  Cars  for  various  periods  of  the  day. 
Showing  its  growth  since  October,  1883. 


DIAGRAM 


SHOWING  THE 

Average  Daily  Aggregate  Passenger  Movement  of  the  Manhattan  Elevated  Railway. 

(four  lines), 

Originating  from  Stations  in  Each  Milf.  Belt  above  and  below  the  City  Hall. 

The  aggregate  movement  is  plotted  on  one-fifth  the  scale  marked  on  the  plate. 

Percentages  of  Up-town  Movement  originating  on  each  mile  are  shown  in  upright  figures,  and  of  Down-town  Movement  in 
slanting  figures. 

The  total  percentages  of  the  whole  traffic  originating  back  of  and  including  each  mile  are  given  in  (parentheses). 
The  Diagram  also  shows  by  vertical  lines  : 

Average  Number  of  Passengers  per  Day  from  each  Station,  Manhattan  Elevated  Railway,  Third  Ave.  Line  ;  October  1887. 


tOOOO 
3000 


-7000 


City  Hal 


+.9 


ffi 


IL  A 


Central  P^rK 


AveraCe  Number  of  Passengers  per  Day  from  each  Station  on  the  Sixth  Ave.  Line  ;  October  1887. 

[These  Diagrams  show  how  very  large  a  proportion  of  the  total  traffic  of  the  New  York  Elevated  Railway  System  (about  60  per  cent.,)  originates 
mile  or  less  of  the  Brooklyn  Bridge  terminus,  and  hence  can  be  equally  well  served  from  Brooklyn,  and  how  slight  is  the  tendency  for  the  center  of  traffic 
up-town.     1  he  contrast  between  the  distribution  of  the  up-town  and  down-town  traffic  likewise  shows  this.] 


within  a 
to  move 


DIAGRAMS  SHOWING  THE  PASSENGER  TRAVEL  BY  HOURS 
AND  GROWTH  THEREIN 
OVER  THE  NEW  YORK  &  BROOKLYN  BRIDGE. 


The  first  two  diagrams  (  I  and  2  ).  and  the  last  two  (  3  and  4  ),  shr 
the  growth  under  substantially  similar  conditions. 

Between   Diagram   2  and   Diagram  3, 

( 1 )  Fares  were  reduced  to  3  cents ; 

(2)  Trains  were  increased  from  two  to  three  cars;  and 

(3)  An  elevated  railway  was  opened. 


i;bh(ioi*.vn  -  •...•« 


5000 

2500  _ 

17th  Nov.  188*  r 
l3mos.  after  No.l  .  i 

2000 

«ENCCflS  £™o™™^ 

1500 

500 

^      .      .     ,      P"  " 

1    2  3  4.  5  6  7 

8  9 

10  II 

444  U- 

>  7  1  ,  9  10  11  12 

25th  May. 1886.                    Mo  3 
13  mos  after   No  Z   

|  1 

:  i 

5500 

| 

50OO 

;  | 

4-500 

1  p' 

pOc}KLYN  =  32I*C 
^ORK  =    38  091 

400O 

-f-j  

3500 

3000 

i  :"• 

8  9 

10  II 

2  3 

A-  b 

6  7  8 

I  loiil 

iS5ENCE«T>     NEW  YORK  Td  BROOKLYN  »  4c. 

BHOOKLYNTOjNL^  YORK  .  484-14- 
totaI     ;     !         ■  9  I  I  30 


5000^ 

450Q 


tt&n: 


APPENDIX  B. 


THE  METROPOLITAN  DEVELOPMENT  OF  NEW  YORK 


[T/ie  subjoined  article,  dealing  with  the  general  question  of  the  future  growth  of 
New  York  and  Brooklyn,  and  of  the  relation  of  the  Bridge  thereto,  appeared  as  an 
editorial  in  Engineering  News  of  March  ij,  1888,  and  is  deemed  of  such  general 
interest  in  connection  with  the  <j  ties  lion  of  enlargement  of  the  Bridge  traffic  facilities, 
and  as  explanatory  of  the  large  colored  map  which  accompanies  the  Report  of  the 
Board  of  Experts,  that  it  has  been  concluded  to  reprint  it  herein.  It  has  tnore  par- 
ticular reference  to  the  expediency  of  providing  for  direct  transit  without  change  of 
cars  over  the  Bridge,  maki?ig  the  New  York  City  Hall,  in  effect,  the  terminus  of  the 
Brooklyn  Elevated  Railway  system,  as  proposed  in  the  recommended  plan.] 

The  large  inset  map  which  accompanies  this  issue  showing  the 
"  Relative  Residence  Areas  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  in  Equi- 
distant Belts  from  the  New  York  City  Hall,"  tells  a  story  which  has 
attracted  singularly  little  attention — perhaps  one  might  more  truly 
say,  no  attention — from  the  people  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn, 
considering  how  vitally  important  it  is  to  the  future  of  those  cities  ; 
viz.,  how  absolutely  indispensable  it  is  to  the  future  of  this  metrop- 
olis as  a  whole  that  the  East  River  should  be  practically  eliminated 
as  an  impediment  to  internal  transit  between  New  York  and 
Brooklyn. 

It  is,  in  our  judgment,  the  most  important  feature  of  the  plans  for 
the  improvement  of  the  Brooklyn  bridge  transit  facilities  which  have 
been  recently  recommended  by  the  Board  of  Experts  that  they  for 
the  first  time  bring  forward  an  easy  and  inexpensive  way  of  doing 
this.  Their  report,  and  the  first  part  of  the  report  submitted  to 
them  descriptive  of  the  recommended  plan,  appears  elsewhere  in 
this  issue  ;  but  we  are  not  concerned  with  the  details  of  that  partic- 
ular plan  ;  still  less  have  we  any  purpose  or  intent  to  enlarge  upon 
its  merits  or  demerits,  to  do  which  would  be  inappropriate  to  these 
columns.  All  we  aim  to  do,  which  is  quite  enough  for  one  article, 
is  to  bring  out  as  clearly  as  possible  the  general  nature  of  the 
problem  of  municipal  development  for  New  York,  and  the  import- 
ance to  both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  of  fixing  on  some  plan,  any 
plan,  for  eliminating  the  East  River  as  an  impeding  factor  to  the 
symmetrical  growth  of  the  metropolis  as  a  whole. 

We  need  hardly  say  that  the  natural  mode  of  growth  of  large 
cities,  when  not  interfered  with  by  topographical  causes,  is  by  a  cir- 
cular spreading  of  population  in  all  directions,  the  residence  area 
under  these  conditions  increasing  as  the  square  of  the  distance  from 


42 


the  center.  London,  Paris,  Philadelphia,  Boston  (to  some  extent) 
and  various  other  great  cities,  are  examples  of  this  law,  under  which 
the  available  residence  area  increases  so  rapidly  that  no  serious 
congestion  of  population  is  possible,  with  its  attendant  evils  of  high 
rents,  heavy  expenses  and  wretched  living.  It  has  been  possible  to 
some  extent  in  the  past,  because  of  the  lack  of  quick  and  cheap 
internal  steam  transportation,  which  is  a  very  modern  thing,  but  it  is 
no  longer  possible  in  such  cities  on  a  considerable  scale,  and  it  is  a 
well  known  fact  that  so  much  of  it  as  has  come  down  as  a  heritage  of 
the  past  is  rapidly  diminishing  under  the  stimulus  of  improved 
methods  of  internal  transportation,  where  they  exist. 

A  still  larger  class  of  cities,  of  which  Chicago.  Brooklyn  and 
Liverpool  may  be  taken  as  types,  are  restricted  topographically  to  a 
fan-like  or  semicircular  process  of  development,  instead  of  to  a 
circular.  In  fact,  as  every  great  city  in  the  world  is  situated  either 
on  a  river  or  large  body  of  water,  this  fan-like  process  of  develop- 
ment may  be  said  to  be  characteristic  of  all  great  cities,  except, 
perhaps,  London  and  Paris,  since  even  a  small  river,  like  the  Dela- 
ware at  Philadelphia,  suffices  to  greatly  impede  the  complete  circular 
development. 

But  even  where,  as  at  Chicago  or  at  Brooklyn,  the  area  open  for 
growth  is  strictly  semi-circular,  so  that  the  development  of  the  city 
must  be  purely  fan-like,  the  same  general  law  holds  that  the  avail- 
able residence  area  increases  as  the  square  of  the  distance,  nor  does 
the  loss  of  the  other  half  of  the  circle  make  so  much  difference  in 
the  convenient  growth  of  the  city  as  might  be  supposed.  The  resi- 
dence area  within  a  given  distance,  indeed,  is  only  half  as  great,  but 
as  it  requires  a  comparatively  small  distance  further  to  double  the 
available  area  the  necessary  distance  to  include  an  equal  area  is  only  41 
per  cent,  greater  (1  to  ^/  2)  in  a  "semi-circular"  city  than  in  a 
"  circular  "  one,  so  that  they  compare  as  follows  : 


Comparative  Radial  Distances  to  include  Equal  Areas. 


In  "  circular  " 
cities  like 
London. 

In  "  semi-circular  " 
cities  like  Chicago 
or  Brooklyn. 

Area  in  sq.  miles  included 
by  the  given  radius 
in  each  case. 

miles 

miles 

sq.  miles 

2 

2.83 

12-57 

3 

4.24 

28.27 

4 

5.66 

50.27 

5 

7.07 

78-54 

6 

8.49 

113  IO 

7 

9.90 

153-94 

8 

II. 31 

201.06 

9 

T2.73 

254-47 

10 

14.14 

314.16 

43 


In  each  case  the  distance  given  for  the  "  semi-circular"  city  is  41.4 
per  cent,  greater  only  than  for  the  complete  circular  development, 
which  is  not  a  particularly  burdensome  addition.  Even  in  case  a 
city  be  so  situated  as  to  be  able  to  grow  over  one  quadrant  only 
(900)  of  a  complete  circle,  the  distances  only  need  to  be  twice  as 
great  to  include  equal  areas,  and  a  city  which  can  expand  over  an 
area  covering  three-quarters  of  a  complete  circle  (2700)  only  needs 
to  extend  15^  per  cent,  farther  to  include  an  equal  area.  In  other 
words,  to  include  an  area  of  50  sq.  miles  : 

MILES. 

A  "circular"  city  like  London  or  Paris,  growing  freely  in  all  directions, 

extends  outward  from  its  center  for  a  durance  of   4. 

A  city  having  only  three  quadrants  of  a  complete  circle  to  expand  in,  will 

extend  outward  a  distance  of   4.62 

A  •'semi-circular"  city,  like  Chicago  or  Brooklyn,  having  only  two  quad- 
rants of  a  circle  to  expand  in,  will  extend  outward  from  the  center  for  5.66 

A  city  having  only  one  quadrant  to  a  circle  to  expand  in,  the  other  three 
quadrants  being  occupied  by  water  or  otherwise  uninhabitable  or  inac- 
cessible, will  extend  outward  from  its  center  (i.  e.  apex)  for.   8. 

We  recall  no  city  of  much  size  which  has  only  one  quadrant  of  a 
circle  to  grow  in.  but  there  are  a  number  which  have  practically 
about  three  quadrants  available,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  in  neither 
of  the  first  three  cases  is  the  difference  of  distance  to  include  the 
same  area  a  very  serious  matter,  while  even  in  the  last  class,  as  the 
business  center  of  a  "single  quadrant"  city  would  not  be  at  the  very 
apex  of  the  quadrant  but  a  mile  or  so  back  of  it,  the  radial  distance 
above  to  include  the  same  residence  area  would  really  be  only  6  or  7 
miles,  instead  of  8  miles.  So  that  the  comparison  with  even  an  un- 
restricted circular  development  is  not  so  very  unfavorable,  even  in 
this  extreme  case. 

But  New  York  is  peculiar  among  the  great  cities  of  the  whole 
world  (and  even  among  the  second  and  third  rate  cities),  in  that  its 
development  is  purely  linear.  Instead  of  the  available  area  increas- 
ing as  the  square  of  the  distance  from  the  center,  or  even  increasing 
directly  as  the  distance,  the  increment  of  area  rather  grows  less  as 
the  distance  increases.  The  map  of  Manhattan  Island  resembles 
nothing  so  much  as  the  head  of  a  gigantic  sea-serpent,  or  perhaps 
tadpole,  of  which  the  City  Hall  Park  is  the  eye  and  the  head  the 
widest  part.  If  the  area  of  Central  Park  be  conceived  to  be  taken 
out  of  the  coast  line  instead  of  the  centre  of  the  island  the  resem- 
blance is  still  more  striking.  Even  including  the  fragment  of  the 
"Annexed  District "  (Morrisania)  shown  on  our  map,  the  total  avail- 
able area  within  given  distances  from  the  business  center  of  the  city 
makes  the  following  very  unfavorable  comparisons  with  "  circular  " 
cities  like  London  or  "  semi-circular  "  cities  like  Chicago  : 


44 


Available  Residence  Area  in  sq.  miles. 


Within  a  radius 
from 
the  centre  of 

London 

Chicago 

New  1  ork 

New  York 
and  Brooklyn 
together. 

i  mile. 

3-T4 

i-57 

1.8 

1.8 

2  miles. 

12.57 

0.26 

4.1 

5-o 

3  " 

28.27 

I4-I3 

6.1 

9-7 

4  " 

50.27 

25-I3 

8.0 

16.6 

5  " 

73.54 

39-27 

9-5 

26.  T 

6  " 

1 13. 10 

56.55 

10.9 

40.I 

7  " 

15394 

76.97 

I2-5 

56.9 

8  " 

201.06 

IO°-53 

14.4 

69-3 

9  *: 

254.47 

127.23 

17  4 

79-5 

[  The  Brooklyn  area  includes  only  so  much  of  each  belt  as  is  shoiun  on  the  map 
herewith.  There  is  really  a  good  deal  more  available  area  in  the  8th  and  9th  mile 
belt  than  is  shown  on  the  map,  although  a  part  of  each,  outside  the  limits  of  the 
map,  is  lost  by  arms  of  the  sea  and  marshes.] 


Under  these  conditions  very  grave  evils,  which  have  been  and  will 
continue  to  be  serious  impediments  to  the  growth  of  the  city,  have 
arisen  in  New  York.  The  magnificent  harbor  and  water  ways  which 
have  made  it  the  great  city  that  it  is  have  not  been  wholly  unmixed 
blessings,  since  they  have  forbidden  a  natural  mode  of  growth. 
Rents  and  land  values  are  very  high  ;  living  expenses  are  high  ;  in 
the  sections  inhabited  by  the  poor,  who  must  constitute  the  vast  ma- 
jority of  every  great  city,  a  terrific  congestion  of  population  has  re- 
sulted, far  greater  than  exists  on  a  large  scale  in  any  other  civilized 
city.  Despite  the  fact  that  all  kinds  and  grades  of  wage-earners  earn 
more  and  spend  more  (because  they  must  to  live)  than  suffices  for  a 
certain  decent  luxury  in  Philadelphia  or  London,  their  homes  in  New 
York  are  poor  and  squalid  to  a  degree.  London  has  grown  up  under 
different  and  much  less  favorable  social  conditions  than  New  York, 
so  that  there  is  vastly  more  misery  there  than  there  would  be  under 
American  conditions,  but  the  contrast  in  the  condition  of  the  poor 
in  New  York  and  Philadelphia  is  a  painful  one  indeed.  Wages  are 
decidedly  lower  in  Philadelphia,  but  almost  every  working  man  has 
a  home  and  a  roof  of  his  own,  whereas  in  New  York  few  heads  of  a 
family  can  afford  it  on  incomes  of  less  than  $3,000  or  $4,000  a  year. 
As  a  consequence,  the  whole  eastern  third  of  the  city,  beyond  the 
Bowery  and  Third  Avenue,  a  few  oases  excepted,  is  one  vast  and 
squalid  tenement  region,  crowded  to  suffocation  with  human  beings? 
a  breeding  place  of  wretchedness  and  crime. 

The  western  two-thirds  of  the  city  has  spots  of  the  same  character, 
but  in  the  main  it  is  given  up  to  the  homes  of  the  well-to-do.  Even 
here,  however,  the  same  relative  conditions  obtain  ;  rents  are  ex- 
tremely high  ;    those  wretched    substitutes  for  homes  known  as 


4? 


"  boarding-houses"  and  "  flats  "  abound  more  than  anywhere  else  on 
the  civilized  globe;  all  provisions  and  supplies  are  dear,  both  because 
of  the  rents  and  cost  of  living,  and  because  of  the  distance  they  must 
be  carted.  As  a  consequence  tens  of  thousands  of  families  are 
spending  $3,000  to  $8,000  a  year  to  maintain  more  or  less  "  style  " 
in  three  or  four  rooms,  who  could  even  in  Boston  or  Philadelphia, 
and  still  more  in  smaller  cities,  live  in  handsome  and  roomy  homes 
for  much  less  money. 

Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  in  every  commercial  or  man- 
ufacturing establishment  every  one  from  the  manager  to  the  office 
boy  must  earn  more  and  live  worse  than  he  would  anywhere  else  for 
the  money,  New  York  grows  rapidly,  but  its  growth  will  never  be  as 
fast  nor  as  great  as  if  these  disadvantages  were  remedied  without  sac- 
rifice of  its  unique  and  unequalled  advantages  of  a  commercial 
metropolis,  which  have  made  it  what  it  is.  The  one  way  to  do  this 
is  to  extend  the  residence  area,  which  can  only  be  done  effect- 
ually by  the  practical  elimination  of  the  East  river  as  an  obstacle  to 
quick  and  cheap  transit.  The  map  which  we  publish,  and  which  the 
Board  of  Experts  for  the  New  York  and  Brooklyn  Bridge  have  at- 
tached to  their  report,  makes  this  too  clear  for  doubt.  In  fact 
Brooklyn  has  for  thirty  years  been  the  relief-valve  for  New  York 
against  conditions  which  would  otherwise  have  long  since  become 
intolerable.  A  city  of  836,000  people  has  grown  up  there,  against 
perhaps  1  450,000  in  New  York  proper,  or  some  2,500,000  including 
Jersey  City  and  other  metropolitan  suburbs,  making  New  York 
already  the  second  city  of  the  world. 

But  New  York  is  plainly  destined  to  be  not  the  second  but  the 
first  city  of  the  world.  If  the  30,000,000  of  people  on  the  little 
island  of  Great  Britain  can  support  a  metropolis  of  4,000,000  it  needs 
no  demonstration  that  not  5,000,000  nor  8,000,000  nor  possibly  even 
10,000,000  will  be  the  ultimate  limit  to  the  population  of  New  York. 
Where  are  the  people  to  go  to,  except  to  Brooklyn  ? 

Across  the  Hudson  river,  on  the  west,  there  is  practically  no  avail- 
able room  until  the  other  side  of  the  Jersey  flats  are  reached,  some 
six  miles  off.  The  area  nearer  New  York  is  given  up  to  salt  marshes, 
mosquitoes,  enormous  railway  terminals  and  the  Palisades.  A  bridge 
over  the  Hudson  river  may  result  in  the  building  up  of  a  great  city 
at  Newark  and  Orange,  but  at  much  disadvantage. 

To  the  north,  beyond  the  limits  of  our  map,  the  area  broadens  out 
somewhat,  but  not  very  much  until  we  get  15  or  20  miles  from  the 
City  Hall,  in  other  words,  beyond  the  reasonable  limits  of  city 
growth.  The  little  sketch  of  this  region  below  shows  this  clearly. 
There  will  be  in  time  another  great  city,  north  of  the  Harlem  River, 
but  it  will  grow  up  under  the  great  disadvantage  of  a  10  or  12-mile 


46 


ride  to  the  business  center  of  the  metropolis  ;  for  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  that  this  will  for  a  century  to  come  (see  diagram 
in  Engineering  News,  Feb.  18,  1888),  be  within  the  area  colored 
dark  on  the  map. 

In  the  meantime  the  population  of  the  metropolis  as  a  whole  is 
increasing  in  a?i  increasing  geometrical  ratio  (see  investigation  of 
Mr.  Rudolph  Hering  in  Engineering  News  of  Jan.  15,  1887,)  and 
the  island  itself  needs  only  a  few  years  more  to  crowd  it  to  repletion. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  still  room  to  add  a  million  of  new 
homes  at  reasonable  rates  within  reasonable  distance  of  the  business 
center  in  the  great  Brooklyn  area  shown  on  the  large  colored  map, 
which  looks  as  if  it  had  been  planned  by  nature  to  be  the  residence 
area  for  the  New  York  business  section.  Nearly  all  of  it  has  a  dry 
and  sandy  soil,  and  is  high  and  easily  drained,  while  a  large  part  of 
it  is  preeminently  attractive  for  residence,  except  for  its  one  great 
drawback,  comparative  inaccessibility.  In  all,  within  a  distance  of 
9^  miles  from  the  New  York  City  Hall  there  is  about  7^  times  the 
available  residence  area  that  there  is  on  Manhattan  island  as  shown 
in  the  following  table  : 

Ratio  of  the  Area  of  Each  Residence  Belt  in  Brooklyn 
to  the  Area  of  the  Corresponding  Belt  in  New  York. 


[In  this  table  the  arcs  marked  3  miles,  4  miles,  etc.  are  assumed  to  pass  through 
the  centre  of  each  belt.    All  park  areas  excluded.] 


Area  in  Sq.  Miles. 

Ratio 

Belt. 

New  York  to 

New  York. 

Brooklyn. 

Brooklyn. 

3  miles. 

1.9 

4-3 

1  to  2.24 

4  " 

1.6 

5-8 

I    "  3.62 

5  " 

*-5 

I  I.O 

1    "  7-33 

6  " 

?-3 

13-7 

I    "  IO.54 

7  " 

i'-i 

'5-6 

I    "  9.18 

8  " 

0.9 

13.2 

I    "  5.00 

Total, 

8.9 

63.6 

1   to  7.15 

The  great  city  which  now  occupies  a  fifth  or  a  sixth  of  this  area 
has  grown  up  under  great  disadvantages,  except  as  respects  the  little 
fraction  of  it  within  walking  distance  of  the  ferries.  To  reach  the 
rest  of  it,  a  man  has  had  to  walk  to  the  ferries,  risk  frequent  delays 
thereon,  scramble  for  a  seat  in  the  horse-car,  take  a  long  and  slow 
ride  therein,  and  perhaps  change  to  still  another  vehicle  to  reach 
the  point  from  which  he  finally  walks  to  his  home.  Thus  he  has 
consumed  from  60  to  80  minutes  in  reaching  points  in  the  4  mile  to 
7  mile  belts,  which  are  reached  on  Manhattan  Island  in  20  to  30 
minutes  by  a  continuous  and  comfortable  trip.    It  is  almost  as  long 


47 


a  trip,  and  a  much  more  uncomfortable  one,  to  reach  uptown  New 
York  from  this  region  than  it  is  from  Philadelphia,  90  miles  off. 

The  inevitable  tendency  has  been  to  make  Brooklyn  a  second- 
class  town.  Rents  are  vastly  cheaper  there  than  in  New  York  ;  a 
fixed  income  will  go  much  further  there,  but  as  a  rule,  with  of  course 
many  exceptions,  only  those  who  feel  obliged  to  make  their  income 
go  as  far  as  possible  have  been  willing  to  put  up  with  the  discomforts 
of  living  there,  in  comparative  exile.  This  fact  is  so  notorious  that 
it  is  needless  to  enlarge  on  it  further.  The  consequence  of  these 
conditions  is  visible  in  the  following  table  : 

TABLE 

Showing  the  Comparative  Areas,  Assessed  Valuation,  and 
Assessed  Valuation  per  Square  Mile  of  the  Belts  at 
Equal  Distances  from  the  NEW  YORK  City  Hall  in  the 
cities  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  as  shown  in  the 
accompanying  map. 


[For  further  explanation  of  Map  and  Table,  see  Appendix,  page  4/.] 


BELT  FROM 

NEW  YORK. 

BROOKLYN. 

NEW  YORK 
CITY  HALL. 

Area 
sq.  miles. 

Assessed 
Value  in 
millions. 

Assessed 
Value 
per  sq.  mile. 

Area 
sq.  miles. 

Assessed 
Value  in 
millions. 

Assessed 
Value 
per  sq.  mile. 

Below  City  Hall 
C.  H.  to  1  M. 
1  to  2  M. 

0.5 
1.3 
.  2.3 

159.4 
170.1 
213.9 

$318,800,000 
130,800,000 
93,000,000 

0.9 

66.3 

S73,TOO.00O 

Total  business 
section. 

4.1 

543.4 

$132,500,000 

0.9 

66.3 

$73,700,000 

2  to  3  M. 

3  to  4  M. 

4  to  5  M. 

5  to  6  M. 

6  to  7  M. 

7  to  8  M. 

8  to  9  M. 

2.0 
1.9 
1.5 
1.4 
1.6 
1.9 
3.0 

194  8 
180  8 
106.7 
79.1 
47.5 
47.4 
368 

$97,400,000 
98,300.000 
71,100.000 
56,500,000 
29,700,000 
25.000,000 
12,300,000 

2.7 
5.0 
8.0 
12.6 
15.2 
10.5 
7.2 

88.0 
114.9 
66.7 
36.2 
19.2 
7.0 
3.0 

$32,600,000 
23,000,000 
8,300.000 
2,900,000 
1,200,000 
400,000 

Total  residence 
section. 

13.3 

699.1 

$52,600,000 

61.2 

335.0 

$5,470,000 

Brooklyn  is  considered  for  the  purposes  of  this  table  to  include  the  entire  area 
of  Long  Island  shown  on  the  map,  and  nothing  beyond  the  limits  of  the  map. 
The  assessed  valuation  (1887)  of  this  whole  area  is,  as  nearly  as  may  be 
$401,300,000. 

The  area  of  both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  which  lies  within  a  distance  of  2 
miles  of  the  New  York  City  Hall  is  regarded  as  the  business  section,  and  colored 
dark  olive.  In  reality,  the  area  thus  colored  in  Brooklyn  is  for  the  most  part  a 
choice  residence  section,  its  value  per  square  mile  being  about  that  of  New  York 
residence  property  above  59th  Street. 

The  assessed  valuation  in  both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  is  supposed  to  be 
somewhat  less  than  60  per  cent,  of  the  market  value. 

The  areas  given  exclude  all  park  areas.  No  attempt  has  been  made  to  make  the 
areas  precise.    They  have  been  simply  scaled  from  the  map. 

The  valuation  of  each  ward,  in  millions  of  dollars  and  fractions,  is  shown  in  red. 
The  fraction  of  this  valuation  appertaining  to  each  mile  belt  has  been  estimated, 
as  also  the  valuations  of  the  outlying  towns,  which  are  not  given  on  the  map. 

Now  if  we  may  suppose  an  intelligent  inhabitant  of  the  moon  to  be 
suddenly  landed  in  this  metropolis,  to  be  told  that  it  was  inhabited 


48 


by  one  of  the  wealthiest,  most  enlightened  and  most  progressive 
people  in  the  world,  to  be  shown  the  map  which  we  publish  in  this 
issue,  and  to  be  told  that  in  the  effort  to  eliminate  the  East  River 
this  people  had  constructed  the  greatest  and  most  costly  bridge  in 
the  world  to  connect  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  a  bridge  capable  of 
carrying  over  a  million  people  daily,  so  far  as  the  structure  itself  is 
concerned  ;  and  if  he  were  told,  furthermore,  that  on  the  little  area 
of  Manhattan  Island  fully  200,000,000  people  yearly  were  carried 
back  and  forth  in  elevated  trains,  and  as  many  more  by  horse-cars, 
and  that  of  this  total  fully  150,000,000  elevated  passengers  and 
50,000,000  horse-car  passengers  were  carried  to  and  from  their  homes 
to  the  downtown  business  section  only;  and  if  he  were  then  asked 
what  this  people  had  done  to  facilitate  communication  with  the 
Brooklyn  area,  via  the  bridge — what  would  be  his  probable  response  ? 

Surely  it  would  be  that  the  Brooklyn  people  for  their  own  conven- 
ience, and  the  Brooklyn  property  owners  for  their  own  profit,  must 
have  united  in  an  effort  to  exhaust  the  resources  of  engineering  to 
place  Brooklyn  strictly  on  an  equality  with  New  York  as  respects 
transit  conveniences,  so  that  the  resident  on  any  one  of  the  colored 
Brooklyn  belts  would  be  able  to  reach  his  New  York  office  as 
quickly  and  as  conveniently  as  from  the  belt  of  like  color  in  New 
York,  at  a  like  distance  from  the  business  center.  He  might  prob- 
ably surmise,  as  is  the  fact,  that  45,000,000  or  50,000,000  people  per 
annum,  living  convenient  to  the  river  front,  would  patronize  ferries 
from  Brooklyn,  just  as  a  nearly  equal  number  uses  the  horse-cars  in 
New  York,  but  balancing  one  of  these  against  the  other,  and  neglect- 
ing both,  he  would  surely  conclude  that  if  150,000,000  people  per 
annum  were  passing  to  and  from  the  uptown  residence  area  and  the 
downtown  business  section,  at  least  as  many  were  coming  from  the 
Brooklyn  area  seven  times  greater,  and  perhaps  two  or  three  times 
as  many.  After  computing  that  if  equal  areas  at  equal  distances 
were  contributing  equal  traffic  there  would  be  7^  times  as  many 
passengers  from  Brooklyn  as  from  upper  New  York,  or  1,087,500,000 
passengers  per  annum,  he  would  probably  estimate  that  there  were 
in  fact  300,000,000  or  400,000,000. 

If  told  that,  instead  of  any  of  these  numbers,  there  were  only 
30,000,000  passengers  per  annum  coming  to  New  York  from  this 
great  area,  and  that  these  used  the  bridge  only  under  conditions  of 
great  discomfort,  viz.,  overcrowded  cars,  transhipment  at  the  bridge 
terminus,  and  slim  chance  of  getting  a  seat  afterwards,  what  would 
be  his  further  conclusion  ? 

Surely  that  the  boasted  enterprise  and  foresight  of  this  people  had 
been  somewhat  overpraised  ;  and  such  we  think  must  be  the  conclu- 
sion of  any  one,  should  the  present  state  of  things  continue  much 


49 

longer,  for  hereafter  at  least  there  can  be  no  excuse  for  it.  Hereto- 
fore there  has  been  no  definite  plan  for  doing  anything  better  than 
is  now  done,  but  in  the  report  of  the  Board  of  Experts  which  we 
publish  herewith  there  is  at  least  one  method  recommended  unequi- 
vocally for  accomplishing  the  ends  which  we  have  noted  at  practi- 
cally no  expense,  since  the  cost  is  met  by  a  saving  in  annual  operating 
expenses.  If  there  be  a  better  plan,  let  it  by  all  means  be  adopted. 
We  are  not  writing  in  the  interest  of  that  or  any  particular  plan,  but 
simply  to  point  out  that  the  present  state  of  things  is  an  absurdity 
which  should  no  longer  be  tolerated.  It  is  plainly  within  the  powers 
of  engineering  to  connect  Brooklyn  and  New  York  as  completely  as 
if  the  East  River  did  not  exist,  and  it  should  be  done  if  it  would  cost 
$20,000,000  or  $30,000,000  instead  of  practically  nothing,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  it  will  pay.  The  Brooklyn  area  shown  has  already 
an  assessed  valuation  of  some  $400,000,000.  Give  it  sufficiently 
excellent  transit  facilities  and  who  that  examines  the  tabular  contrast 
above  can  doubt  that  this  valuation  can  be  doubled  ?  But  if  it  were 
merely  increased  10  per  cent,  by  expending  $20,000,000  there  would 
still  be  100  per  cent,  profit  on  the  operation. 

Such  a  result  is  really  as  important  to  New  York  proper  as  to 
Brooklyn.  New  York  values  will  not  fall  because  Brooklyn  values 
rise,  but  rather  the  contrary.  The  effect  of  a  complete  elimination  of 
the  East  River  as  an  obstacle  to  the  growth  of  the  city  (which  can 
only  be  fully  attained  by  two  or  three  bridges  in  place  of  one,  as  the 
map  shows  tolerably  clear)  would  in  our  view  be  as  follows  : 

New  York  will  for  the  first  time  have  a  healthy  unimpeded  growth. 
The  horribly  overcrowded  tenement  population  will  gradually  melt 
away,  and  be  transferred  to  cheaper  and  better  homes  at  Flushing, 
Canarsie  and  Gravesend.  Clerks  and  other  people  of  small  income 
will  gain  a  similar  advantage,  as  would  also  people  of  large  income, 
for  Brooklyn  will  cease  to  repel  them.  The  disproportionate  expense 
of  doing  business  of  any  kind  in  New  York  will  consequently  dis- 
appear, leaving  the  advantages  of  doing  so  unchanged.  Hence 
manufacturing  especially  will  be  greatly  stimulated,  and  many  other 
kinds  of  business  which  now  avoid  New  York  if  possible  will  gradu- 
ally center  here.  The  end  will  be  that  nearly  all  New  York  below 
42d  Street  will  be  given  up  to  business  and  manufacturing  ;  there 
will  be  a  choice  residence  section  around  Central  Park  and  a  great 
city  north  of  the  Harlem  River,  but  the  home  of  the  vast  multitude 
which  is  soon  to  be  centered  at  this  metropolis  will  be  on  the  western 
end  of  Long  Island,  as  nature  evidently  intended,  since  it  left  no 
other  place  for  them. 


